↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of novel caudal hindbrain genes reveals different regulatory logic for gene expression in rhombomere 4 versus 5/6 in embryonic zebrafish

Overview of attention for article published in Neural Development, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Analysis of novel caudal hindbrain genes reveals different regulatory logic for gene expression in rhombomere 4 versus 5/6 in embryonic zebrafish
Published in
Neural Development, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13064-018-0112-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Priyanjali Ghosh, Jennifer M. Maurer, Charles G. Sagerström

Abstract

Previous work aimed at understanding the gene regulatory networks (GRNs) governing caudal hindbrain formation identified morphogens such as Retinoic Acid (RA) and Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs), as well as transcription factors like hoxb1b, hoxb1a, hnf1ba, and valentino as being required for rhombomere (r) r4-r6 formation in zebrafish. Considering that the caudal hindbrain is relatively complex - for instance, unique sets of neurons are formed in each rhombomere segment - it is likely that additional essential genes remain to be identified and integrated into the caudal hindbrain GRN. By taking advantage of gene expression data available in the Zebrafish Information Network (ZFIN), we identified 84 uncharacterized genes that are expressed in r4-r6. We selected a representative set of 22 genes and assayed their expression patterns in hoxb1b, hoxb1a, hnf1b, and valentino mutants with the goal of positioning them in the caudal hindbrain GRN. We also investigated the effects of RA and FGF on the expression of this gene set. To examine whether these genes are necessary for r4-r6 development, we analyzed germline mutants for six of the genes (gas6, gbx1, sall4, eglf6, celf2, and greb1l) for defects in hindbrain development. Our results reveal that r4 gene expression is unaffected by the individual loss of hoxb1b, hoxb1a or RA, but is under the combinatorial regulation of RA together with hoxb1b. In contrast, r5/r6 gene expression is dependent on RA, FGF, hnf1ba and valentino - as individual loss of these factors abolishes r5/r6 gene expression. Our analysis of six mutant lines did not reveal rhombomere or neuronal defects, but transcriptome analysis of one line (gas6 mutant) identified expression changes for genes involved in several developmental processes - suggesting that these genes may have subtle roles in hindbrain development. We conclude that r4-r6 formation is relatively robust, such that very few genes are absolutely required for this process. However, there are mechanistic differences in r4 versus r5/r6, such that no single factor is required for r4 development while several genes are individually required for r5/r6 formation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 26%
Researcher 3 16%
Other 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 16%
Neuroscience 3 16%
Physics and Astronomy 1 5%
Design 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 June 2019.
All research outputs
#7,957,552
of 15,161,635 outputs
Outputs from Neural Development
#60
of 195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,734
of 276,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neural Development
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,161,635 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them