Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 345

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Loss of Hox-A1 (Hox-1.6) function results in the reorganization of the murine hindbrain

Carpenter, Ellen M., Goddard, Judy M., Chisaka, Osamu, Manley, Nancy R., Capecchi, Mario R.·1993·Development
DOI 10.1242/dev.118.4.1063
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Targeted disruption of the murine hox-A1 gene results in severe defects in the formation of the hindbrain and associated cranial ganglia and nerves. Carbocyanine dye injections were used to trace afferent and efferent projections to and from the hindbrain in hox-A1 /hox-A1 mutant mice. Defects were observed in the position of efferent neurons in the hindbrain and in their projection patterns. In situ hybridization was used to analyze the transcription pattern of genes expressed within specific rhombomeres. Krox-20, int-2 (fgf-3), and hox-B1 all display aberrant patterns of expression in hox-A1 mutant embryos. The observed morphological and molecular defects suggest that there are changes in the formation of the hindbrain extending from rhombomere 3 through rhombomere 8 including the absence of rhom-bomere 5. Also, motor neurons identified by their axon projection patterns which would normally be present in the missing rhombomere appear to be respecified to or migrate into adjacent rhombomeres, suggesting a role for hox-A1 in the specification of cell identity and/or cell migration in the hindbrain.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1242/dev.118.4.1063

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 27

  1. Altman, 1982, Development of the cranial nerve ganglia and related nuclei in the rat, 1
  2. Bally-Cuif, 1992, Relationship between Wnt-1 and En-2 expression domains during early development of normal and ectopic met-mesencephalon, Development, 115, 999, 10.1242/dev.115.4.999 · DOI
  3. Chavrier, 1988, A gene encoding a protein with zinc fingers is activated during G0/G1 transition in cultured cells, EMBO J, 7, 29, 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1988.tb02780.x · DOI · Paper page
  4. Chisaka, 1992, Developmental defects of the ear, cranial nerves, and hindbrain resulting from targeted disruption of the mouse homeobox gene Hox-1.6, Nature, 355, 516, 10.1038/355516a0 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Duboule, 1989, The structural and functional organization of the murine Hox gene family resembles that of Drosophila homeotic genes, EMBO J, 8, 1497, 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1989.tb03534.x · DOI · Paper page
  6. Fraser, 1990, Segmentation in the chick embryo hindbrain is defined by cell lineage restrictions, Nature, 344, 431, 10.1038/344431a0 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Frohman, 1990, Isolation of the mouse Hox-2.9 gene; analysis of embryonic expression suggests that positional information along the anterior-posterior axis is specified by mesoderm, Development, 110, 589, 10.1242/dev.110.2.589 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Graham, 1989, The murine and Drosophila homeobox gene complexes have common features of organization and expression, Cell, 57, 367, 10.1016/0092-8674(89)90912-4 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Guthrie, 1991, Formation and regeneration of rhombomere boundaries in the developing chick hindbrain, Development, 112, 221, 10.1242/dev.112.1.221 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Harland, 1991, In situ hybridization: an improved whole mount method for Xenopus embryos, Meth. Cell Biol, 36, 685, 10.1016/S0091-679X(08)60307-6 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Hunt, 1991, The branchial Hox code and its implications for gene regulation, patterning of the nervous system and head evolution, Development Supplement, 2, 63
  12. Lufkin, 1991, Disruption of the Hox-1.6 homeobox gene results in defects in a region corresponding to its rostral domain of expression, Cell, 66, 1105, 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90034-V · DOI · Paper page
  13. Lumsden, 1990, The cellular basis of segmentation in the developing hindbrain, Trends Neurosci, 13, 329, 10.1016/0166-2236(90)90144-Y · DOI · Paper page
  14. Lumsden, 1989, Segmental patterns of neuronal development in the chick hindbrain, Nature, 337, 424, 10.1038/337424a0 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Lumsden, 1991, Segmental origin and migration of neural crest cells in the hindbrain region of the chick embryo, Development, 113, 1281, 10.1242/dev.113.4.1281 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Mansour, 1990, Introduction of a lac-Z reporter gene into the mouse int-2 locus by homologous recombination, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 87, 7688, 10.1073/pnas.87.19.7688 · DOI
  17. Mansour, 1993, Mice homozygous for a targeted disruption of the proto-oncogene int-2 have developmental defects in the tail and inner ear, Development, 117, 13, 10.1242/dev.117.1.13 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Marshall, 1992, Retinoic acid alters hindbrain Hox code and induces transformation of rhombomeres 2/3 into a 4/5 identity, Nature, 360, 737, 10.1038/360737a0 · DOI · Paper page
  19. McMahon, 1990, The Wnt-1 (int-1) proto-oncogene is required for development of a large region of the mouse brain, Cell, 62, 1073, 10.1016/0092-8674(90)90385-R · DOI · Paper page
  20. Murphy, 1989, Segment-specific expression of a homeobox-containing gene in the mouse hindbrain, Nature, 341, 156, 10.1038/341156a0 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Murphy, 1991, Expression of the mouse labial-like homeobox-containing genes, Hox-2.9 and Hox-1.6, during segmentation of the hindbrain, Development, 111, 61, 10.1242/dev.111.1.61 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Noden, 1986, The developing ear: tissue origins and interactions, 15
  23. Scott, 1992, Vertebrate homeobox gene nomenclature, Cell, 71, 551, 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90588-4 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Serbedzija, 1992, Vital dye analysis of cranial neural crest migration in the mouse embryo, Development, 116, 297, 10.1242/dev.116.2.297 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Wilkinson, 1988, Expression of the FGF-related proto-oncogene int-2 during gastrulation and neurulation in the mouse, EMBO J, 7, 691, 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1988.tb02864.x · DOI · Paper page
  26. Wilkinson, 1989, Segment-specific expression of a zinc-finger gene in the developing nervous system of the mouse, Nature, 337, 461, 10.1038/337461a0 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Wilkinson, 1989, Segmental expression of Hox-2 homeobox-containing genes in the developing mouse hindbrain, Nature, 341, 405, 10.1038/341405a0 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Carpenter, E. M., Goddard, J. M., Chisaka, O., Manley, N. R., & Capecchi, M. R.
Venue
Development
Publisher
The Company of Biologists
Published
1993-08-01
Volume
118
Issue
4
Pages
1063-1075
ISSN
  • 0950-1991 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9129
DOI
10.1242/dev.118.4.1063
OpenAlex
W2125246072
Cited by
345
References
0
FWCI
8.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.biologists.com/user-licence-1-1/ (vor)

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.