Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33620314›Full record

ArticleeLife2021

Physically asymmetric division of the

Radek Jankele, Rob Jelier, Pierre Gönczy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Altering cell size asymmetry inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Asymmetric division of stem cells and its cancer relevance.Cell regeneration (London, England) · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Collective effects of cell cleavage dynamics.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Manipulation of Embryonic Cleavage Geometry Using Magnetic Tweezers.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Delineating the mechanisms and design principles ofComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Radek JankeleSwiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research (ISREC), School of Life Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1056-6556
Rob JelierCentre of Microbial and Plant Genetics, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-6395-1407
Pierre GönczySwiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research (ISREC), School of Life Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6305-6883

Funding

Enhancing and expanding the CGC Strain CollectionP40OD010440 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI Aric L Daul, Ann E. Rougvie · 2012 to 2026
$7.5M
NIH HHS P40 OD010440
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Asymmetric divisions that yield daughter cells of different sizes are frequent during early embryogenesis, but the importance of such a physical difference for successful development remains poorly understood. Here, we investigated this question using the first division of

Indexed as

Cell DivisionEmbryonic DevelopmentAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansCell DifferentiationCell LineageEmbryo, NonmammalianZygoteasymmetric cell divisionC. eleganscell biologycell sizedevelopmental biologydivision timingembryogenesislin-5

Identifiers

PMID33620314
PMCPMC7972452

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.