Cited by 766Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationCongenital heart defects research

Cleavage orientation and the asymmetric inheritance of notchl immunoreactivity in mammalian neurogenesis

Open access
Chenn, Anjen, McConnell, Susan K.·1995·Cell

Abstract

Neurons in the mammalian central nervous system are generated from progenitor cells near the lumen of the neural tube. Time-lapse microscopy of dividing cells in slices of developing cerebral cortex reveals that cleavage orientation predicts the fates of daughter cells. Vertical cleavages produce behaviorally and morphologically identical daughters that resemble precursor cells; these symmetric divisions may serve to expand or maintain the progenitor pool. In contrast, horizontally dividing cells produce basal daughters that behave like young migratory neurons and apical daughters that remain within the proliferative zone. Notch1 immunoreactivity is distributed asymmetrically in mitotic cells, with Notch1 inherited selectively by the basal (neuronal) daughter of horizontal divisions. These results provide cellular and molecular evidence that cortical neurons are generated from asymmetric divisions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90035-7

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • During brain development, RGCs can divide symmetrically or asymmetrically; symmetric divisions result in two daughter RGCs, while asymmetric divisions produce a RGC and one other cell.

    “During brain development, RGCs can divide symmetrically or asymmetrically. While symmetric divisions result in two daughter RGCs, asymmetric divisions produce a RGC and one another cell [96].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chenn, A., & McConnell, S. K.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Venue
Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1995-08
Volume
82
Issue
4
Pages
631-641
ISSN
0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2021515035
Cited by
766
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 22
FWCI
10.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH51864)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007365, GM 07365)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Congenital heart defects research
Keywords
cleavage orientation, asymmetric cell division, Notch1, neurogenesis, cortical development, neural progenitor cells, neuronal fate specification, time-lapse microscopy
MeSH terms
Animals, Cell Division, Cerebral Cortex, Ferrets, Immunohistochemistry, Membrane Proteins, Neurons, Receptors, Cell Surface, Stem Cells, Time Factors, Transcription Factors, Cell Polarity, Receptor, Notch1

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review