Cited by 289Developmental Biology and Gene RegulationGene Regulatory Network AnalysisWnt/β-catenin signaling in development and cancer

Self-Enhanced Ligand Degradation Underlies Robustness of Morphogen Gradients

Open access
Eldar, Avigdor, Rosin, Dalia, Shilo, Ben-Zion, Barkai, Naama·2003·Developmental Cell

Abstract

Morphogen gradients provide long-range positional information by extending across a developing field. To ensure reproducible patterning, their profile is invariable despite genetic or environmental fluctuations. Common models assume a morphogen profile that decays exponentially. Here, we show that exponential profiles cannot, at the same time, buffer fluctuations in morphogen production rate and define long-range gradients. To comply with both requirements, morphogens should decay rapidly close to their source but at a significantly slower rate over most of the field. Numerical search revealed two network designs that support robustness to fluctuations in morphogen production rate. In both cases, morphogens enhance their own degradation, leading to a higher degradation rate close to their source. This is achieved through reciprocal interactions between the morphogen and its receptor. The two robust networks are consistent with properties of the Wg and Hh morphogens in the Drosophila wing disc and provide novel insights into their function.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1534-5807(03)00292-2

Cites

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?

  • Tissue-level modeling has shown that the robustness of a pattern can generally be improved with negative feedback regulation.

    “For example, tissue-level modeling has shown that the robustness of a pattern can generally be improved with negative feedback regulation (Eldar et al. 2003;Reeves et al. 2005).”

    From Graded dorsal and differential gene regulation in the Drosophila embryo. (2009) · cites this paper as Eldar et al. 2003

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eldar, A., Rosin, D., Shilo, B.-Z., & Barkai, N.
Affiliations
Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
Corresponding author
Barkai, Naama
Venue
Developmental Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-10
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
635-646
ISSN
1534-5807 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2037921918
Cited by
289
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 19
FWCI
6.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Developmental Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Israel Science Foundation
  • Center for Theoretical Biological Physics
  • Minerva Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Wnt/β-catenin signaling in development and cancer
Keywords
morphogen gradients, gradient robustness, ligand degradation, exponential decay, ligand-receptor interactions, Drosophila wing disc, positional information
MeSH terms
Animals, Computer Simulation, Drosophila, Ligands, Luminescent Proteins, Models, Biological, Morphogenesis, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Tissue Distribution, Signal Transduction, Neural Networks, Computer, Gene Expression Regulation, Developmental, Body Patterning, Drosophila Proteins, Green Fluorescent Proteins, Wnt1 Protein, Hedgehog 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