Cited by 76Developmental Biology and Gene RegulationGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsRNA Research and Splicing

Drawing lines in the sand: even skipped et al. and parasegment boundaries

Open access
Jaynes, James B, Fujioka, Miki·2004·Developmental Biology

Abstract

The pair-rule segmentation gene even skipped (eve) is required to activate engrailed stripes and to organize odd-numbered parasegments (PSs). The protein product Eve has been shown to be an active repressor of transcription, and recent models for Eve function suggest that activation of engrailed is indirect, but these models have not been fully tested. Here we identify the forkhead domain transcription factor Sloppy-paired as the key intermediate in the initial activation of engrailed by Eve in odd-numbered parasegments. We also analyze the roles of the transcription factors Runt and Odd-skipped in this process. Detailed analysis of engrailed and pair-rule gene expression in various mutant combinations shows how eve activates engrailed by repressing these engrailed repressors, and further indicates that mutual repression among pair-rule genes plays an important role in establishing parasegment boundaries. We present a new model of pair-rule gene function that explains the response of these boundaries to the relative levels of Eve and Fushi Tarazu.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.03.001

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • The architecture of pair rule GRNs in Drosophila and Tribolium, composed of largely the same genes, is very different, but they generate the same downstream outcomes, the expression of wg and en across each parasegment border.

    “The architecture of pair rule GRNs in Drosophila and Tribolium, which are composed of largely the same genes is very different (Choe and Brown, 2009; Jaynes and Fujioka, 2004), but, amazingly, they generate the same downstream outcomes, the expression of wg and en across each parasegment border.”

    From Evolution of Gene Regulatory Networks Controlling Body Plan Development (2011) · cites this paper as Jaynes and Fujioka, 2004

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jaynes, J. B., & Fujioka, M.
Affiliations
Thomas Jefferson University (US)
Corresponding author
Jaynes, James B
Venue
Developmental Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-05
Volume
269
Issue
2
Pages
609-622
ISSN
0012-1606 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2092846446
Cited by
76
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Developmental Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • The Medicine Forum (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM50231, R01GM050231)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Research and Splicing
Keywords
even-skipped, engrailed, pair-rule genes, forkhead transcription factor, runt, fushi tarazu, mutual repression, transcriptional repression
MeSH terms
Animals, Blood Proteins, Complement C4, DNA-Binding Proteins, Drosophila, Nuclear Proteins, Repressor Proteins, Transcription Factors, Homeodomain Proteins, Gene Expression Regulation, Developmental, Drosophila Proteins

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