Cited by 269Microtubule and mitosis dynamicsDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Dlg, Scrib and Lgl regulate neuroblast cell size and mitotic spindle asymmetry

Albertson, Roger, Doe, Chris Q.·2003·Nature Cell Biology

Abstract

Asymmetric cell division is important in generating cell diversity from bacteria to mammals. Drosophila melanogaster neuroblasts are a useful model system for investigating asymmetric cell division because they establish distinct apical-basal cortical domains, have an asymmetric mitotic spindle aligned along the apical-basal axis, and divide unequally to produce a large apical neuroblast and a small basal daughter cell (GMC). Here we show that Discs large (Dlg), Scribble (Scrib) and Lethal giant larvae (Lgl) tumour suppressor proteins regulate multiple aspects of neuroblast asymmetric cell division. Dlg/Scrib/Lgl proteins show apical cortical enrichment at prophase/metaphase, and then have a uniform cortical distribution. Mutants have defects in basal protein targeting, a reduced apical cortical domain and reduced apical spindle size. Defects in apical cell and spindle pole size result in symmetric or inverted neuroblast cell divisions. Inverted divisions correlate with the appearance of abnormally small neuroblasts and large GMCs, showing that neuroblast/GMC identity is more tightly linked to cortical determinants than cell size. We conclude that Dlg/Scrib/Lgl are important in regulating cortical polarity, cell size asymmetry and mitotic spindle asymmetry in Drosophila neuroblasts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ncb922

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Albertson, R., & Doe, C. Q.
Affiliations
Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Doe, Chris Q.
Venue
Nature Cell Biology
Published
2003-01-27
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
166-170
ISSN
  • 1465-7392 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4679
OpenAlex
W2004361537
Cited by
269
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
FWCI
5.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Cell Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM58899, R01GM058899)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Microtubule and mitosis dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Keywords
asymmetric cell division, neuroblasts, cell size asymmetry, Discs large, Scribble, lethal giant larvae, tumor suppressor proteins, Drosophila melanogaster
MeSH terms
Animals, Cell Division, Drosophila melanogaster, Membrane Proteins, Microscopy, Fluorescence, Spindle Apparatus, Neurons, Cell Polarity, Cell Cycle Proteins, Insect Proteins, Tumor Suppressor Proteins, Drosophila Proteins, Cell Size

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