Cited by 75Developmental Biology and Gene RegulationCongenital limb and hand anomaliesZebrafish Biomedical Research Applications

dackel acts in the ectoderm of the zebrafish pectoral fin bud to maintain AER signaling

Grandel, Heiner, Draper, Bruce W., Schulte-Merker, Stefan·2000·Development

Abstract

Classical embryological studies have implied the existence of an apical ectodermal maintenance factor (AEMF) that sustains signaling from the apical ectodermal ridge (AER) during vertebrate limb development. Recent evidence suggests that AEMF activity is composed of different signals involving both a sonic hedgehog (Shh) signal and a fibroblast growth factor 10 (Fgf10) signal from the mesenchyme. In this study we show that the product of the dackel (dak) gene is one of the components that acts in the epidermis of the zebrafish pectoral fin bud to maintain signaling from the apical fold, which is homologous to the AER of tetrapods. dak acts synergistically with Shh to induce fgf4 and fgf8 expression but independently of Shh in promoting apical fold morphogenesis. The failure of dak mutant fin buds to progress from the initial fin induction phase to the autonomous outgrowth phase causes loss of both AER and Shh activity, and subsequently results in a proximodistal truncation of the fin, similar to the result obtained by ridge ablation experiments in the chicken. Further analysis of the dak mutant phenotype indicates that the activity of the transcription factor engrailed 1 (En1) in the ventral non-ridge ectoderm also depends on a maintenance signal probably provided by the ridge. This result uncovers a new interaction between the AER and the dorsoventral organizer in the zebrafish pectoral fin bud.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1242/dev.127.19.4169

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grandel, H., Draper, B. W., & Schulte-Merker, S.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology (DE)
  • University of Oregon (US)
  • Max-Planck-Institut für Entwicklungsbiologie 1 , Abt. 3, Spemannstr. 35, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
Corresponding author
Grandel, Heiner
Venue
Development
Published
2000-10-01
Volume
127
Issue
19
Pages
4169-4178
ISSN
  • 0950-1991 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9129
OpenAlex
W2113162350
Cited by
75
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Congenital limb and hand anomalies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Zebrafish Biomedical Research Applications
Keywords
apical ectodermal ridge, pectoral fin bud, Sonic hedgehog, FGF10, FGF4, FGF8, EN1
MeSH terms
Animals, Ectoderm, Embryonic Induction, Epidermis, Extremities, Fibroblast Growth Factors, Genes, Homeobox, Morphogenesis, Mutation, Proteins, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Transcription Factors, Zebrafish, Trans-Activators, Tissue Transplantation, Homeodomain Proteins, Limb Buds, Zebrafish Proteins, Fibroblast Growth Factor 4, Fibroblast Growth Factor 8, Hedgehog Proteins

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