The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Expression of the mouse labial-Alike homeobox-containing genes, Hox 2.9 and Hox 1.6, during segmentation of the hindbrain
Abstract
The sequence of a mouse Hox 2.9 cDNA clone is presented. The predicted homeodomain is similar to that of the Drosophila gene labial showing 80 % identity. The equivalent gene in the Hox 1 cluster is Hox 1.6 which shows extensive similarity to Hox 2.9 both within and outside the homeodomain. Hox 2.9 and Hox 1.6 are the only two mouse members of the labial-tike family of homeobox-containing genes as yet identified. Hox 2.9 has previously been shown to be expressed in a single segmental unit of the developing hindbrain (rhombomere) and has been predicted to be involved in conferring rhombomere identity. To analyse further the function of Hox 2.9 during development and to determine if the other mouse labial-tike gene Hox 1.6, displays similar properties, we have investigated the expression patterns of these two genes and an additional rhombomere-specific gene, Krox 20, on consecutive embryonic sections at closely staged intervals. This detailed analysis has enabled us to draw the following conclusions: There are extensive similarities in the temporal and spatial expression of Hox 2.9 and Hox 1.6, throughout the period that both genes are expressed in the embryo ( to 10 days). At 8 days the genes occupy identical domains in the neuroectoderm and mesoderm with the same sharp anterior boundary in the presumptive hindbrain. These similarities indicate a functional relationship between the genes and further suggest that the-labial-tike genes are responding to similar signals in the embryoBy 9 days the neuroectoderm expression of both genes retreats posteriorly along the anteroposterior (AP) axis. The difference at this stage between the expression patterns is the persistence of Hox 2.9 in a specific region of the hindbrain, illustrating the capacity of Hox 2.9 to respond to additional positional regulatory signals and indicating a unique function for this gene in the hindbrain.The restriction of Hox 2.9 expression in the hindbrain occurs at days, approximately the same time as Krox 20 is first detected in the posterior adjoining domain. The mutually exclusive expression of Hox 2.9 and Krox 20 demarcated by sharp expression boundaries suggest that compartmentalisation of cells within the hindbrain has occurred up to 6 h before rhombomeres (morphological segments) are clearly visible.Hox 2.9 expression is confined to the region of rhombomere 4 that shows cell lineage restriction and, unlike Krox 20, is expressed throughout the period that rhombomeres are visible (to days). These data strengthen the evidence that Hox 2.9 participates in conferring segment identity.Migrating neural crest cells that arise from rhombomere 4 are uniquely identified by the expression of Hox 2.9 supporting the idea that neural crest cells are patterned according to their rhombomeric origin.The Hox 1.6 gene product is differentially transcribed; only one of the two alternative transcripts codes for a homeodomain-containing protein. A comparison of the distribution patterns of the two transcripts shows that the relative proportion of homeo-domain-producing message decreases as development proceeds.
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
Cited by
An analysis of vertebrate mRNA sequences: intimations of translational control.
Kozak, M. (1991) · The Journal of cell biology · doi:10.1083/jcb.115.4.887 · Cited by 1,635
Hox Genes: Choreographers in Neural Development, Architects of Circuit Organization
Philippidou, P., & Dasen, J. S. (2013) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2013.09.020 · Cited by 423
The role of Hoxa-3 in mouse thymus and thyroid development
Manley, N. R., & Capecchi, M. R. (1995) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.121.7.1989 · Cited by 429
Endocrine Regulation of HOX Genes
Daftary, G. S., & Taylor, H. S. (2006) · Endocrine Reviews · doi:10.1210/er.2005-0018 · Cited by 344
Wada, H., Saiga, H., Satoh, N., & Holland, P. W. H. (1998) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.125.6.1113 · Cited by 312
Tischfield, M. A., Bosley, T. M., Salih, M. A. M., Alorainy, I. A., Sener, E. C., Nester, M. J., Oystreck, D. T., Chan, W.-M., Andrews, C., Erickson, R. P., et al. (2005) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1636 · Cited by 304
The zinc finger gene Krox20 regulates HoxB2 (Hox2.8) during hindbrain segmentation
Sham, M. H., Vesque, C., Nonchev, S., Marshall, H., Frain, M., Gupta, R. D., Whiting, J., Wilkinson, D., Charnay, P., & Krumlauf, R. (1993) · Cell · doi:10.1016/0092-8674(93)90659-e · Cited by 295
Spatial mechanisms of gene regulation in metazoan embryos
Davidson, E. H. (1991) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.113.1.1 · Cited by 233
PARALOGOUS HOX GENES: Function and Regulation
Maconochie, M., Nonchev, S., Morrison, A., & Krumlauf, R. (1996) · Annual Review of Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev.genet.30.1.529 · Cited by 220
Chapter 8 Hox Genes and Segmentation of the Vertebrate Hindbrain
Tümpel, S., Wiedemann, L. M., & Krumlauf, R. (2009) · Current Topics in Developmental Biology · doi:10.1016/s0070-2153(09)88004-6 · Cited by 150
Roles of Hoxa1 and Hoxa2 in patterning the early hindbrain of the mouse
Barrow, J. R., Stadler, H. S., & Capecchi, M. R. (2000) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.127.5.933 · Cited by 151
Kmita, M., van der Hoeven, F., Zákány, J., Krumlauf, R., & Duboule, D. (2000) · Genes & Development · doi:10.1101/gad.14.2.198 · Cited by 95
Tümpel, S., Cambronero, F., Ferretti, E., Blasi, F., Wiedemann, L. M., & Krumlauf, R. (2007) · Developmental Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2006.10.029 · Cited by 79
Metadata
- Authors
- Murphy, P., & Hill, R. E.
- Venue
- Development
- Publisher
- The Company of Biologists
- Published
- 1991-01-01
- Volume
- 111
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 61-74
- ISSN
- 0950-1991 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9129
- OpenAlex
- W2099715509
- Cited by
- 237
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.