Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34055302›Full record

ArticleInterface focus2021

Time and space in segmentation.

Erik Clark

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interface focus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Molecular and Mechanical Cues for Somite Periodicity.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    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

1 author.

Erik ClarkDepartment of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, 210 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5588-796X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Arthropod segmentation and vertebrate somitogenesis are leading fields in the experimental and theoretical interrogation of developmental patterning. However, despite the sophistication of current research, basic conceptual issues remain unresolved. These include: (i) the mechanistic origins of spatial organization within the segment addition zone (SAZ); (ii) the mechanistic origins of segment polarization; (iii) the mechanistic origins of axial variation; and (iv) the evolutionary origins of simultaneous patterning. Here, I explore these problems using coarse-grained models of cross-regulating dynamical processes. In the morphogenetic framework of a row of cells undergoing axial elongation, I simulate interactions between an 'oscillator', a 'switch' and up to three 'timers', successfully reproducing essential patterning behaviours of segmenting systems. By comparing the output of these largely cell-autonomous models to variants that incorporate positional information, I find that scaling relationships, wave patterns and patterning dynamics all depend on whether the SAZ is regulated by temporal or spatial information. I also identify three mechanisms for polarizing oscillator output, all of which functionally implicate the oscillator frequency profile. Finally, I demonstrate significant dynamical and regulatory continuity between sequential and simultaneous modes of segmentation. I discuss these results in the context of the experimental literature.

Indexed as

clock and wavefrontDrosophiladynamicspatterningsegmentationsomitogenesis

Identifiers

PMID34055302
PMCPMC8086912

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.