ArticleScientific reports2019
Homeobox code model of heterodont tooth in mammals revised.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- You Should Look a Gift Ungulate in the Mouth: Using 2D Occlusal Cheek Tooth Morphology to Study the Evolution of Molarization in Ungulates.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Comparative Analyses Reveal Conserved and Modified Steps in the Testis Descent and Scrotum Development in Mouse and Opossum.Cells, tissues, organs · 2025Article
- Article
- Bat teeth illuminate the diversification of mammalian tooth classes.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Evolutionary mechanisms modulating the mammalian skull development.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Mammalian dental diversity: an evolutionary template for regenerative dentistry.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2023Review
- Responses of Epibranchial Placodes to Disruptions of the FGF and BMP Signaling Pathways in Embryonic Mice.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heterodonty is one of the hallmarks of mammals. It has been suggested that, homeobox genes, differentially expressed in the ectomesenchyme of the jaw primordium along the distal-proximal axis, would determine the tooth classes (homeobox code model) based on mouse studies. Because mouse has highly specialized tooth pattern lacking canine and premolars (dental formula: 1003/1003, for upper and lower jaws, respectively), it is unclear if the suggested model could be applied for mammals with all tooth classes, including human. We thus compared the homeobox code gene expressions in various mammals, such as opossum (5134/4134), ferret (3131/3132), as well as mouse. We found that Msx1 and BarX1 expression domains in the jaw primordium of the opossum and ferret embryos show a large overlap, but such overlap is small in mouse. Detailed analyses of gene expressions and subsequent morphogenesis of tooth germ in the opossum indicated that the Msx1/BarX1 double-positive domain will correspond to the premolar region, and Alx3-negative/Msx1-positive/BarX1-negative domain will correspond to canine. This study therefore provides a significant update of the homeobox code model in the mammalian heterodonty. We also show that the modulation of FGF-mediated Msx1 activation contributes to the variation in the proximal Msx1 expression among species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.