Drosophila segmentation genes and blastoderm cell identities

BioEssays ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Peter Gergen
Keyword(s):  
Segmentation Genes ◽  
Blastoderm Cell

Regulation of runt transcription by Drosophila segmentation genes

1993 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Klinger ◽  
J.Peter Gergen
Keyword(s):  
Segmentation Genes

scholarly journals Segmentation Genes and the Development of Skeletal Muscle Progenitors in Zebrafish

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Elisabeth Windner
Keyword(s):  
Skeletal Muscle ◽  
Segmentation Genes

Expression of engrailed during segmentation in grasshopper and crayfish

Development ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
N.H. Patel ◽  
T.B. Kornberg ◽  
C.S. Goodman
Keyword(s):  
Monoclonal Antibody ◽  
Cell Proliferation ◽  
Cell Division ◽  
Embryonic Stage ◽  
Germ Band ◽  
Segmentation Genes ◽  
Pair Rule ◽  
Drosophila Embryos ◽  
The Way

We have used a monoclonal antibody that recognizes engrailed proteins to compare the process of segmentation in grasshopper, crayfish, and Drosophila. Drosophila embryos rapidly generate metameres during an embryonic stage characterized by the absence of cell division. In contrast, many other arthropod embryos, such as those of more primitive insects and crustaceans, generate metameres gradually and sequentially, as cell proliferation causes caudal elongation. In all three organisms, the pattern of engrailed expression at the segmented germ band stage is similar, and the parasegments are the first metameres to form. Nevertheless, the way in which the engrailed pattern is generated differs and reflects the differences in how these organisms generate their metameres. These differences call into question what role homologues of the Drosophila pair-rule segmentation genes might play in other arthropods that generate metameres sequentially.

Bicaudal Mutations of Drosophila melanogaster: Alteration of Blastoderm Cell Fate

1985 ◽  
Vol 50 (0) ◽  
pp. 105-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Mohler ◽  
E.F. Wieschaus
Keyword(s):  
Drosophila Melanogaster ◽  
Cell Fate ◽  
Blastoderm Cell

Dominant maternal interactions with Drosophila segmentation genes

1988 ◽  
Vol 197 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herv� Tricoire
Keyword(s):  
Segmentation Genes

scholarly journals wimp, a dominant maternal-effect mutation, reduces transcription of a specific subset of segmentation genes in Drosophila.

1991 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
S M Parkhurst ◽  
D Ish-Horowicz
Keyword(s):  
Maternal Effect ◽  
Segmentation Genes ◽  
Specific Subset

scholarly journals Evolutionary conservation pattern of zinc-finger domains of Drosophila segmentation genes.

1992 ◽  
Vol 89 (22) ◽  
pp. 10782-10786 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. J. Sommer ◽  
M. Retzlaff ◽  
K. Goerlich ◽  
K. Sander ◽  
D. Tautz
Keyword(s):  
Zinc Finger ◽  
Evolutionary Conservation ◽  
Segmentation Genes ◽  
Zinc Finger Domains ◽  
Conservation Pattern

Hierarchy of the genetic interactions that specify the anteroposterior segmentation pattern of the Drosophila embryo as monitored by caudal protein expression

Development ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Mlodzik ◽  
W.J. Gehring
Keyword(s):  
Protein Product ◽  
The Body ◽  
Drosophila Embryo ◽  
Fate Map ◽  
Gradient Distribution ◽  
Segmentation Genes ◽  
Anteroposterior Axis ◽  
Segmentation Pattern ◽  
Maternal Determinants ◽  
Homeotic Selector

The establishment of the body pattern of Drosophila along the anteroposterior axis requires the coordinated functions of at least three classes of genes. First, the maternally active coordinate genes define the polarity of the embryo and act as primary determinants; second, the segmentation genes divide the developing embryo into the correct number of segments and third, the segments become specified by the homeotic selector genes. We have examined the effects of mutations in the genes of the first two classes on the spatial distribution of the protein product(s) of the caudal (cad) gene, which in wild type shows a graded distribution along the anteroposterior axis during the syncytial blastoderm stage, whereas its persistent zygotic expression is confined to the telson region (the posterior terminal structures). Mutations in maternal genes that specify the spatial coordinates of the egg and the future embryo change the gradient distribution of cad according to the alterations of the fate map which they produce. A second group of maternally expressed genes, the gap genes of the ‘grandchildless-knirps’ group, which are considered to represent posterior activities, do not have any effect on the cad gradient. The same is true for the zygotic segmentation genes that are active after fertilization. However, the same class of zygotic genes partly affects the zygotic cad expression in the telson. Therefore, the two phases of cad expression represent different levels within the genetic hierarchy. The cad protein gradient seems to form in response to the primary maternal determinants independent of the segmentation genes, whereas the latter influence zygotic cad expression in the telson region which corresponds to a homeotic selector gene function.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document