Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41166424›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025

Reevaluation of whether histones are asymmetrically segregated during asymmetric divisions of stem cells in

Anqi Li, Dong Tong, Benjamin Ohlstein, Zheng Guo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Reply to Chen: Methodological and analytical considerations in the study of H3-Dendra2 distribution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Reassessing evidence for symmetric histone inheritance inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Stem cell competition.Current topics in developmental biology · 2026
    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

4 authors.

Anqi Li *Department of Medical Genetics, School of Basic Medicine, Institute for Brain Research, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0367-0005
Dong Tong *Department of Medical Genetics, School of Basic Medicine, Institute for Brain Research, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.ORCID 0009-0006-0226-1791
Benjamin OhlsteinChildren's Research Institute and Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75235.ORCID 0000-0003-4742-927X
Zheng GuoDepartment of Medical Genetics, School of Basic Medicine, Institute for Brain Research, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2874-7141

Funding

National Natual Science Foundation of China 32271074National Natural Science Foundation of China 31771625National Natural Science Foundation of China 31970817National Natural Science Foundation of China 32470885
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent work suggests that asymmetric segregation of preexisting and newly synthesized canonical histone 3.1 (H3.1), but not variant histone 3.3A (H3.3A), plays an important role in the asymmetric outcome of

Indexed as

Asymmetric Cell DivisionDrosophila melanogasterHistonesStem CellsAnimalsDrosophila ProteinsMaleTestisDrosophila ProteinsHistonesasymmetric divisionDendra2newly synthesized histonespreexisting histonessymmetric segregation

Identifiers

PMID41166424
PMCPMC12595462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.