ArticleJournal of anatomy1998
Surface ectodermal wound healing in the chick embryo.
Article in Journal of anatomy, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrative biology of injury in animals.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2023Review
- Septin-dependent remodeling of cortical microtubule drives cell reshaping during epithelial wound healing.Journal of cell science · 2018Article
- Computational and experimental study of the mechanics of embryonic wound healing.Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials · 2013Article
- Gene signatures in wound tissue as evidenced by molecular profiling in the chick embryo model.BMC genomics · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Wound healing has been studied in the surface ectoderm overlying the midbrain region of stages 16-20 chick embryos by light microscopy, scanning and transmission electron microscopy, and immunofluorescent techniques. The embryos were divided into 6 groups, i.e. stages 16-17 for groups I, V and VI, and stages 19-20 for groups II, III and IV. For groups I and II embryos, a longitudinal incision about 0.6 mm was made close to the dorsal midline and the embryos incubated for varying periods of time up to 24 h. To determine the role of actin in the process of healing, selected groups I and II embryos were stained with FITC phalloidin and the wound margins examined using a confocal microscope. Wounds of all embryos in group I and about 20% in group II healed completely within 24 h of reincubation. The process of healing involved a change in the shapes of the ectodermal cells at the wound ends. This appeared as a zipping-up of the wound from both ends. In about 80% of group II embryos where healing did not occur, wound gaping was marked. Intense actin staining (actin cable) was observed at the wound margins of groups I and II embryos suggesting that the actin purse-string mechanism may play a role during wound healing in this epithelial model. The role of tension in wound healing was also determined by placing 2 secondary wounds about 0.5-0.7 mm long close to, and at right angles to the ends of the primary wound in groups III and V embryos. The procedure decreased the tension within the ectodermal cells at the wound ends. Groups IV and VI embryos served as controls for groups III and V embryos, respectively. Healing of both primary and secondary wounds after reduction of tension was rapid. Most primary wounds in group V embryos healed completely within 3 h of reincubation and the rate of reepithelialisation after the reduction of tension was about 160% more than that in group VI (control) embryos. Similarly, most primary wounds in group III embryos were almost closed within 6 h of reincubation. Here, the rate of reepithelialisation was 80 % more than that in group IV (controls). Thus tension is an important factor in wound healing in this model.
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.