The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
EcR isoforms in Drosophila: testing tissue-specific requirements by targeted blockade and rescue
Open accessAbstract
The three Drosophila EcR isoforms differ only at their N termini;thus, they share the conserved ligand-binding domain transcriptional activation function (AF2) and only differ in the unconserved A/B region, which contains a second, isoform-specific, activation function (AF1). We have developed a dominant-negative mutant EcR (EcR-DN), expressed it in flies with the GAL4/UAS system, and used it to block ecdysone signaling in eight tissues or groups of tissues. Localized EcR-DN arrests ecdysone-dependent development in the target cells and often — because of a molting checkpoint —arrests development globally. Simultaneously expressing individual wild-type EcR isoforms in the same target tissues suppresses the EcR-DN phenotype and identifies the rescuing isoform as sufficient to support the development of the target. Every isoform, and even an N-terminal truncated EcR that lacks any AF1, supports development in the fat body, eye discs, salivary glands,EH-secreting neurosecretory cells and in the dpp expression domain,implying that AF1 is dispensable in these tissues. By contrast, only EcR-A is able to support development in the margins of the wing discs, and only EcR-B2 can do so in the larval epidermis and the border cells of the developing egg chamber. In light of our results, the simplest explanations for the widespread spatial and temporal variations in EcR isoform titers appear untenable.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Taneja, R., Rochette‐Egly, C., Plassat, J., Penna, L., Gaub, M., & Chambon, P. (1997) · The EMBO Journal · doi:10.1093/emboj/16.21.6452 · Cited by 113
Hodin, J., & Riddiford, L. M. (1998) · Development Genes and Evolution · doi:10.1007/s004270050186 · Cited by 105
Cited by
Nuclear receptors — a perspective from Drosophila
King-Jones, K., & Thummel, C. S. (2005) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1581 · Cited by 586
Rusten, T. E., Lindmo, K., Juhász, G., Sass, M., Seglen, P. O., Brech, A., & Stenmark, H. (2004) · Developmental Cell · doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2004.07.005 · Cited by 490
20-hydroxyecdysone upregulatesAtggenes to induce autophagy in the Bombyx fat body
Tian, L., Ma, L., Guo, E., Deng, X., Ma, S., Xia, Q., Cao, Y., & Li, S. (2013) · Autophagy · doi:10.4161/auto.24731 · Cited by 148
A Membrane Transporter Is Required for Steroid Hormone Uptake in Drosophila
Okamoto, N., Viswanatha, R., Bittar, R., Li, Z., Haga-Yamanaka, S., Perrimon, N., & Yamanaka, N. (2018) · Developmental Cell · doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2018.09.012 · Cited by 144
Fat‐body remodeling in Drosophila melanogaster
Nelliot, A., Bond, N., & Hoshizaki, D. K. (2006) · genesis · doi:10.1002/dvg.20229 · Cited by 122
Metadata
- Authors
- Cherbas, L., Hu, X., Zhimulev, I., Belyaeva, E., & Cherbas, P.
- Venue
- Development
- Publisher
- The Company of Biologists
- Published
- 2003-01-15
- Volume
- 130
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 271-284
- ISSN
- 0950-1991 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9129
- OpenAlex
- W2024513653
- Cited by
- 338
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.