Cited by 644Neurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationDiptera species taxonomy and behavior

The art and design of genetic screens: Drosophila melanogaster

St Johnston, Daniel·2002·Nature Reviews Genetics

Abstract

The success of Drosophila melanogaster as a model organism is largely due to the power of forward genetic screens to identify the genes that are involved in a biological process. Traditional screens, such as the Nobel-prize-winning screen for embryonic-patterning mutants, can only identify the earliest phenotype of a mutation. This review describes the ingenious approaches that have been devised to circumvent this problem: modifier screens, for example, have been invaluable for elucidating signal-transduction pathways, whereas clonal screens now make it possible to screen for almost any phenotype in any cell at any stage of development.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrg751

Cites

0 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?

  • Genetic modifier screens are commonly applied to identify genes that act in developmental or biochemical pathways in fruit flies, worms, and bacteria, but this approach is rare in the mouse.

    “Genetic modifier screens are commonly applied to identify genes that act in developmental or biochemical pathways in fruit flies, worms, and bacteria10; however, this approach is rare in the mouse11,12.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
St Johnston, D.
Venue
Nature Reviews Genetics
Published
2002-03
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
176-188
ISSN
  • 1471-0056 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0064
OpenAlex
W2027125425
Cited by
644
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 36
FWCI
1.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Diptera species taxonomy and behavior
Keywords
forward genetic screen, Drosophila melanogaster, modifier screen, embryonic patterning, signaling pathways
MeSH terms
Animals, Crosses, Genetic, Drosophila melanogaster, Enhancer Elements, Genetic, Eye, Female, Genetic Testing, Male, Phenotype, Gene Expression, Genes, Suppressor, Mutagenesis, Genes, Insect

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