ArticleCell reports2019
Bioinformatics Screening of Genes Specific for Well-Regenerating Vertebrates Reveals c-answer, a Regulator of Brain Development and Regeneration.
Article in Cell reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanisms underpinning spontaneous spinal cord regeneration.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2025Review
- The subfunctionalization ofFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
- The emergence ofFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
- Tail Tales: What We Have Learned About Regeneration from Xenopus Laevis Tadpoles.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- The Change Rate of theBiology · 2024Article
- Evolution Oroinformatics: A Deep Learning Perspective in Personalised Dental Care.International dental journal · 2024Article
- Wide-scale identification of novel/eliminated genes responsible for evolutionary transformations.Biology direct · 2023Article
- MAPK/ERK Pathway as a Central Regulator in Vertebrate Organ Regeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- The engine initiating tissue regeneration: does a common mechanism exist during evolution?Cell regeneration (London, England) · 2021Review
- The Secreted Protein Disulfide Isomerase Ag1 Lost by Ancestors of Poorly Regenerating Vertebrates Is Required forFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- Protein-Coding Genes in Euarchontoglires with Pseudogene Homologs in Humans.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- von Willebrand factor D and EGF domains is an evolutionarily conserved and required feature of blastemas capable of multitissue appendage regeneration.Evolution & development · 2020Article
- Screening for mouse genes lost in mammals with long lifespans.BioData mining · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The molecular basis of higher regenerative capacity of cold-blooded animals comparing to warm-blooded ones is poorly understood. Although this difference in regenerative capacities is commonly thought to be a result of restructuring of the same regulatory gene network, we hypothesized that it may be due to loss of some genes essential for regeneration. We describe here a bioinformatic method that allowed us to identify such genes. For investigation in depth we selected one of them encoding transmembrane protein, named "c-Answer." Using the Xenopus laevis frog as a model cold-blooded animal, we established that c-Answer regulates regeneration of body appendages and telencephalic development through binding to fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFRs) and P2ry1 receptors and promoting MAPK/ERK and purinergic signaling. This suggests that elimination of c-answer in warm-blooded animals could lead to decreased activity of at least two signaling pathways, which in turn might contribute to changes in mechanisms regulating regeneration and telencephalic development.
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.