|
|
|
Vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 763-769, March 15, 1998
Department of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115 USA
Although it has long been clear that correct development of
left-right (LR) asymmetry requires that tissues in the early embryo know whether they lie to the left or right of the midline, the molecular mechanisms that invariantly orient the LR axis have remained
obscure. The recent demonstration that the
iv (inverted viscerum) mutation in the mouse may be
caused by a mutation in a gene encoding an axonemal dynein heavy chain
has been much anticipated (Afzelius 1976 Most internal organs in the chest and abdomen of all vertebrates lie
asymmetrically along the LR body axis despite external bilateral
symmetry of the organism itself. In all normal individuals, the LR axis
is invariantly oriented such that the apex of the heart points to the
left, the aorta loops to the right and the inferior vena cava runs to
the left of the spinal column. Similarly, the right lung is divided
into three lobes whereas the left has only two. Beneath the diaphragm,
the stomach and spleen are on the left and the intestine runs from
right to left. Deviation from this normal pattern of asymmetry
(situs solitus) can lead to complete mirror-image reversals of
internal organ placement and anatomy (situs inversus) or
randomization of organ situs (heterotaxy) as well as some loss of
asymmetry (isomerism) (Burn 1991 The search for genes that control the overall pattern of asymmetry has
provided some insight into early events leading to LR specification.
The first demonstrations of asymmetric gene expression preceding
organogenesis was made in chick embryos (Levin et al. 1995
![]()
Article
Top
Article
References
; Brown et al. 1991
; Levin and
Nascone 1997
) and sheds light on the earliest steps in the
determination of LR asymmetry (Supp et al. 1997
). However, many
questions are also raised, such as what the roles of axonemal versus
cytoplasmic dynein are, and how dynein action is transmitted across
fields of cells, a prerequisite to the large-scale asymmetric gene
expression known to be involved in determination of body asymmetry
(Fujinaga 1996
; Levin et al. 1997
). In this review we discuss the
nature of the information flow from molecular chirality to
morphological and behavioral asymmetry as well as some possible molecular
candidates for these processes. We also address the timing of initial LR
decisions during embryogenesis, and evolutionary aspects of asymmetry.
; Winer-Muram 1995
). Complete
situs inversus does not appear to confer any adverse effects
on the individual, yet, nonetheless, is estimated to occur in only
1/20,000 humans (although this is commonly thought to under-represent the actual number). Heterotaxia, in contrast, usually
results in multiple abnormalities many of which, such as complex heart
or vascular defects, are fatal without surgical intervention.
Similarly, isomerisms such as Ivemark's sequence (right isomerism,
characterized by asplenia) as well as left isomerism (characterized by
polysplenia) frequently compromise viability but, in less severe cases,
may escape clinical detection (Burn 1991
). A hallmark of most sporadic,
familial, and experimentally-induced cases of laterality defects is
that the organism does not lose its asymmetry; rather, individual
organs (separately or together) can exhibit mirror-image asymmetry
(Levin et al. 1995
; Fujinaga 1996
). This has led to the idea that
asymmetric development or placement of an individual organ is distinct
from the mechanism that orients the LR axis during development. In the
absence of LR cues, therefore, the individual organs often become
unbiased and develop with either normal or inverted asymmetry.
). Subsequent
studies using mouse, Xenopus, and zebrafish embryos suggests
that details of the left and right cascades of gene activation may not
be conserved (Matzuk et al. 1995
; Chiang et al. 1996
; Collignon et al.
1996
; Lowe et al. 1996
); however, in all species examined, it appears
that the left-sided gene cascade culminates in expression of
nodal, which encodes a TGF
family member (Fig. 1,
2). An important aspect of the
these studies is that misexpression of either left- or right-sided
genes unbiases organ situs and leads to heterotaxia (Levin et al. 1997
;
Sampath et al. 1997
). This, combined with the expression of the
cascades prior to organogenesis, suggests that nodal and other
downstream genes, such as lefty-1 and lefty-2 [also
encoding TGF
family members (Meno et al. 1996
)], provide LR cues
to the developing organs. An important implication of this work is that
mutations in these genes are likely to underlie both familial and
sporadic cases of laterality defects in humans. This is likely to be
the case for a familial X-linked situs abnormality that results from mutations in Zic3 (Gebbia et al. 1997
), a gene encoding a zinc finger transcription factor. Interestingly, Zic3 shares structural similarity with the product of the Drosophila pair-rule gene
odd paired (opa) and with the Drosophila
gene cubitus interruptus (ci). opa is
involved in maintaining expression of the Drosophila homolog
of the mammalian Wnt genes, wingless (wg),
whereas ci is homologous to the vertebrate gli genes
that encode a family of factors best known for their involvement in
mediating signaling in response to proteins encoded by the hedgehog
genes, including Sonic hedgehog (Shh), suggesting its
involvement in the left-sided cascade (Fig. 1). An added benefit of
characterizing human mutations in proteins involved in LR signaling
cascades will be the important structural information that will be
revealed, not the least of which will be alterations yielding potent
dominant negative factors which may prove useful for misexpression
studies in experimentally accessible species.

View larger version (25K):
[in a new window]
Figure 1.
Development of LR asymmetry in animal development.
The development of LR asymmetry in animal morphology can be divided
into three phases. In the first phase, the LR axis is first oriented with respect to the AP and DV axes. This process is likely to involve
the cytoskeleton and genes such as iv and inv. In the second phase, this information is magnified into multicellular fields
of asymmetric gene expression. The third phase consists of asymmetric
morphogenesis of various organs by differential tissue behavior, driven
by the asymmetric gene expression.

View larger version (49K):
[in a new window]
Figure 2.
Three phases of elaboration of LR asymmetry. The
first step consists of differentiating the left and right sides on the
cellular level. This probably takes place by means of a chiral molecule (shown in detail in Fig. 3). A subset of the cells
(yellow) of the fairly early embryo undergo this process (A).
Localized cellular asymmetry is propagated between cells to cause LR
determinants to accumulate on one side of the embryonic midline,
possibly by a process involving transport through gap junctions. These
determinants would then induce cascades of factors in multicellular
fields of the embryo (B). Finally, the asymmetric presence of
these factors induces or suppresses asymmetrically located organs such
as the spleen and regulates asymmetric morphogenesis of other organs such as the heart tube (C).
Although studies of the genetic cascades involved in LR axis
orientation are certainly an important advance, they do not explain how
LR asymmetry is oriented with respect to the anteroposterior (AP) and
dorsoventral (DV) axes because sided gene expression most certainly
reflects some earlier asymmetry in the embryo. It is in this regard
that the finding that a gene encoding an axonemal dynein heavy chain is
mutated in the murine iv locus is particularly fascinating.
The absence of ciliary dynein arms is thought to be responsible for the
immotile cilia and situs inversus characteristic of
Kartagener's syndrome (Afzelius 1976
, 1985
). The similarity between
the manifestations of Kartagener's syndrome and the
iv/iv phenotype have led to the anticipation that iv might encode a component of the dynein motor complex
and that oriented microtubule arrays may, in some way, provide a cue for LR pattern (Levin and Nascone 1997
).
Dyneins are microtubule-based motor proteins that have been
traditionally classified as either axonemal or cytoplasmic (for review,
see Holzbaur and Vallee 1994
). Axonemal dyneins coordinate sliding
between adjacent microtubules and provide the motive force for beating
of cilia and flagella. Cytoplasmic dyneins transport cellular cargo
towards the minus ends of microtubules and mediate numerous processes
including retrograde axonal transport, nucleus-directed transport of
lysosomes, endosomes, and the Golgi apparatus, as well as chromosome
movement during cell division. Dyneins function as large multisubunit
complexes containing a mixture of heavy chains responsible for force
production, intermediate chains likely involved in subcellular
localization, light intermediate chains (absent in axonemal dyneins)
and light chains. The complex also interacts with dynactin, itself a
large multisubunit complex that appears important for attachment to
cellular cargo. At least 15 distinct dynein heavy chain genes are known
which, for the most part, have been classified as either axonemal or
cytoplasmic based on sequence analysis including a diagnostic alanine
(cytoplasmic) or aspartate (axonemal) residue downstream from the
highly conserved first P-loop.
Aided by the observation that legless (lgl), created
by insertion of a transgene, is allelic with iv (Singh et al.
1991
), Supp et al. (1997)
cloned a novel dynein heavy chain that is
mutated in both iv and lgl. As expected, transcripts
for the gene, termed left-right dynein (lrd), are
normally present in a range of ciliated epidermis in newborn and adult
mice. In the early postimplantation embryo, however, expression was
detected only in the ventral cells of the node by in situ
hybridization. Transcripts were visible as early as day 7.5, prior to
the appearance of nodal and lefty-1 and
lefty-2 mRNAs, which lose their normal-sided expression in iv/iv mice (Lowe et al. 1996
; Meno et al. 1996
).
The node lacks beating cilia [but does have immotile monocilia which
lack dynein arms (Bellomo et al. 1996
)]; therefore, it appears
unlikely that ciliary beating is the mechanism by which lrd is
involved in orienting LR asymmetry. Even though the predicted protein
sequence of LRD resembles a canonical axonemal dynein, it is not
unprecedented for expression of the axonemal class in nonciliated
cells, raising the possibility that they operate inside the cell
(Vaisberg et al. 1996
). Because the node is likely to be involved in
early LR patterning (see below), the proposal, favored by Supp et al., that a dynein motor complex acts within cells of the node to polarize it along the LR axis is particularly attractive.
How might the dynein motor complex polarize node cells? When the chick
node is ablated prior to stage 4, it is regenerated such that the
embryo develops with normal AP and LR asymmetry (Yuan et al. 1995
;
Psychoyos and Stern 1996
). In addition to defining a window of
developmental plasticity, this experiment also suggests that the node
might be sensitive to signals from surrounding tissue. Acquisition of
LR pattern within node cells can be visualized by Shh
expression, which first occurs at low levels uniformly throughout the
node but becomes stronger and left-sided at stage 4+ (Levin et al.
1995
). Thus, the emerging picture is that the chick node becomes
oriented between stages 4 to 5 and, in turn, programs sided gene
expression in lateral plate mesoderm shortly thereafter (see Fig. 2).
One hypothesis is that LRD may function to polarize the node in
response to external cues and, thus, would limit Shh expression to the left side. Unfortunately, Shh transcripts
are not detected asymmetrically in the mouse node (Collignon et al. 1996
), so this hypothesis cannot be tested by studying Shh
expression in nodes of iv/iv embryos. The answer
will await defining either the mouse node equivalent of Shh or
developing the means to disrupt LRD function in the chick node.
Assuming a cytoplasmic dynein complex is involved in patterning LR
asymmetry, how might arrays of microtubules become oriented with
respect to DV and AP axes? lrd transcripts were noted (Supp et
al. 1997
) only in the ventral cells of the node (at the egg cylinder
stage, the epiblast and hypoblast of the mouse embryo are shaped like a
cup with the inside, epiblast surface being dorsal) and, since these
cells are ingressing ventrally towards the extraembryonic, visceral
endoderm (hypoblast), it seems likely that they have knowledge of the
DV axis. Presumably, this information is inherent in the epiblast prior
to node formation, possibly provided by association with the visceral
endoderm or contact with extracellular matrix. Thus, assuming that AP
pattern precedes LR pattern (see below), it is possible that the node
or the primitive streak calculates LR information from external AP
(head process/streak) cues and intrinsic knowledge of DV
(epiblast/hypoblast) polarity
the informational
equivalent of orienting the "F" molecule (see below).
Precisely which tissue derives LR information from AP and DV is
unclear. While the expression of lrd and many other members of
the LR cascade in the node suggest it as the likely candidate, it
should be also noted that expression of lrd was detected as early as day 3.5 in mouse (Supp et al. 1997
), and chick embryos exhibit
asymmetrical expression of several genes along the entire length of the
streak just before node formation (Levin et al. 1995
, 1997
). Based on
this we propose that, at least in the chick, it is more likely that the
initial LR calculations are done in the base of the streak
(Köhler's sickle is a reasonable choice), and propagated through
the streak where the information is integrated with the other complex
signaling going on in the node as gastrulating cells pass through it.
Consistent with this view, HNF3
and
activin receptor IIa are both expressed asymmetrically in the
primitive ridges at stages 3-4
, prior to known asymmetry in the
node (Levin et al. 1995
, 1997
). Thus, it is possible that the node
receives LR cues from the primitive streak immediately adjacent to it.
One possibility therefore is that the node functions as a discrete
relay station in the passage of LR signals from early events at
Köhler's Sickle (e.g.), to the latter events initiated by
nodal expression.
Wherever the derivation of LR cues from DV and AP information takes
place, it is unclear how the three cardinal body axes are integrated at
a molecular level. Much of the thinking regarding coordination of the
three cardinal body axes has been influenced by Brown and Wolpert who
proposed the involvement of a chiral molecule, termed the "F"
molecule, that would recognize the polarity of two fixed axes to orient
the third (Brown and Wolpert 1990
; see Fig. 3). An
attractive possibility is that microtubules are fundamentally involved.
Microtubules may be involved as part of the input or the output of the
calculation that combines LR, AP, and DV information. In one model
(Brown and Wolpert 1990
; Brown et al. 1991
), microtubules may be
oriented with respect to either AP or DV, and permit binding of a
chiral F molecule. Additional input from the remaining unaligned axis
(DV or AP) would fix the direction of the F molecule and thus orient
the LR axis. Alternatively, in the output model (Levin and Nascone
1997
), a chiral F molecule that is oriented with respect to the AP and
DV axes could initiate microtubule nucleation along the LR axis (e.g.,
minus end to the left), allowing the easy unidirectional transport of
LR determinants by proteins such as dynein (as in Fig. 3). Examination
of cytoskeletal components in the various mouse mutants may
differentiate between these two models. In either case, the node,
streak, or Köhler's Sickle may turn out to be the crucial
site(s) for the integration of AP and DV that results in the first
determination of LR pattern.
|
An additional mechanism for integrating DV and LR information, as well
as for asserting cellular LR differences across multicellular fields of
cells, may involve gap junctions (Levin and Nascone 1997
). Gap
junctions between cells allow the passage of small signaling molecules
(Bruzzone et al. 1996
; Goodenough et al. 1996
) and are thought to be
involved in a variety of key developmental events (Fraser et al. 1987
;
Guthrie and Gilula 1989
; Lo 1996
). Interestingly, early
Xenopus embryos exhibit dorsoventral differences in
gap-junctional communication (GJC) (Guthrie 1984
; Guthrie et al. 1988
;
Olson and Moon 1992
). By regulating the flow of small LR morphogens,
differential dorsoventral patterns of GJC can result in a LR asymmetric
distribution of such molecules on an embryo-wide scale (as in Fig. 2).
Consistent with this hypothesis, manipulations of GJC in early
Xenopus embryos lead to specific laterality defects (M. Levin
and M. Mercola, in prep.). We are currently pursuing the role of gap
junctions in coordinating the LR and DV axes.
Recent studies of twinned chick (Levin et al. 1997
) and
Xenopus (Hyatt et al. 1996
; Nascone and Mercola 1997
) embryos
have also been interpreted as evidence that the initial orientation of
LR asymmetry is first determined within the streak or node [or their
amphibian counterpart(s)]. During normal development, the
presumed radial symmetry of the blastoderm (chicks) or
fertilized egg (Xenopus) is first broken when future streak or
organizer tissue acquires the ability to organize the embryo's DV and
AP axes (for review, see Slack and Tannahill 1992
; Sive 1993
). Ectopic AP/DV organizing centers either occur spontaneously or
can be induced readily in Xenopus by microinjection of
molecules that signal through the
Wnt/
-catenin/Lef-Tcf/Siamois
pathway (Moon et al. 1997
). Spontaneous head-to-head twins in chick
embryos each develop normal LR asymmetry (Levin et al. 1997
) unless the two body axes are closely juxtaposed such that interference between the
left and right programs of gene expression can occur (Levin et al.
1996
). In one such scenario, right-sided activin would suppress the
left-sided program initiated by Shh and might account for the
loss of LR asymmetry frequently seen in the right sibling of human
twins joined at the trunk. Similarly, in Xenopus embryos, induced secondary body axes that form the left sibling of side-by-side twins also exhibit normal LR asymmetry (Nascone and Mercola 1997
). Because, in chick and Xenopus twins, each body axis is
initiated by separate organizing centers, it has been argued that no LR pattern exists in the embryo prior to the induction of the organizing centers themselves, which would then locally orient LR asymmetry. This
conclusion is consistent with temporal data from Danos and Yost (1996)
suggesting that LR asymmetry is patterned after gastrulation. However,
the data cannot rule out the possibility that induced (and primary)
axes may take LR cues from a circumferential pattern that might exist
in the embryo, much as is thought to occur in ciliates (Frankel 1991b
).
In either model, all the experiments point to the embryo's organizing
centers as the likely source of de novo LR calculation or integration
of circumferential pattern with DV and AP.
Several difficult but important mechanistic questions remain. Where and when is the LR axis actually oriented with respect to the DV and AP? Is the location of this center the same in all species? Do microtubules become arrayed in these cells following programming by surrounding tissues? What is the nature of the signals from surrounding cells that pattern them? Perhaps the greatest insight will be gained by understanding the nature of the F molecule (indeed whether it really exists), the elucidation of whether it functions within the node, and, if so, whether it acts upstream or downstream of lrd.
Even more elusive are the questions of why and how LR asymmetry arose
evolutionarily. It is unclear whether asymmetry (or more likely,
chirality) is basic to the animal body plan, and the seeming outward
symmetry of most animals a later modification, or whether asymmetry is
the later tweak that is imposed on a basically symmetrical system
(Jefferies 1991
). Likewise, it is entirely unclear why
consistent asymmetry is so prevalent. One could argue that some asymmetry is necessary in organs such as the gut and heart,
for physiological reasons. Mechanisms for generating asymmetry between
two sides are also easy to imagine, given gene networks and
magnification of small stochastic differences, such as in the
Notch-Delta system (Artavanis-Tsakonas et al. 1995
). Given the ease of
generating such random asymmetry, and given that animals with full
situs inversus appear phenotypically unimpaired, why are not
all animal populations a racemic mixture of opposite enantiomers in a
1:1 ratio? The ubiquity of consistently biased, not
simply asymmetric, species suggests that either the biasing component is an extremely old vestige of our evolution, or that for some unknown
reason it is not possible to produce offspring with a pure 50:50
incidence of situs inversus totalis and situs
solitus. This impossibility is consistent with the observation that
the iv mouse, usually thought of as instantiating this
possibility, actually has significant incidence of heterotaxia, and is
thus phenotypically impaired (Layton 1978
). Interestingly, the
sinistral forms of certain chiral snail shells are seen, upon close
inspection, to also imply consequences for shell form aside
from chirality (Gould and Young 1985
).
Another interesting issue concerns the degree of linkage of visceral
and neurological asymmetry. Brain lateralization and hand preference
are popular examples of LR asymmetry (Harnad 1977
). Amazingly, patients
with situs inversus exhibit the same low incidence of
left-handedness as is found in the general population (Cockayne 1938
;
Torgersen 1950
). The fact that developmental processes can be perturbed
in such a way as to fully reverse morphological asymmetry of the
viscera but leave brain asymmetry in its normal bias suggests either
that the mechanisms controlling neurological asymmetry comprise a
completely separate pathway from those controlling body situs,
or that they are linked, but that mutations giving rise to human
laterality defects have so far occurred at points downstream of the
divergence of the two pathways. Given that most manipulations studied
to date involve all visceral organs, the latter possibility would imply
that neurological asymmetry is calculated and set apart from body
situs quite early in development.
Whether neurological asymmetry represents an early branch of the
general LR system or a completely different pathway has significant bearing on an issue that has been crucial at all points in the study of
LR determination: the timing when left is first distinguished from
right in development. Different times can be plausibly suggested as the
earliest possible step, for different animals. Ciliates are perpetually
chiral and inherit their asymmetry directly from the parent (Nelsen et
al. 1989
; Frankel 1991a
). Snails occur in dextral and sinistral forms,
and the first signs of this show up in the chirality of radial cleavage
at the first few cell divisions (van-den-Biggelaar 1991
). The same is
true of Caenorhabditis elegans, whose asymmetry stems from
asymmetric early cell divisions and the mechanical forces of the egg
shell (Wood 1991
, 1997
; Hutter and Schnabel 1994
). In more complex
organisms such as the frog and chick, the situation is more complex,
and it is unlikely that LR decisions are permanently made until at
least blastula (frog) or equivalent stage in amniotes. This is
consistent with the observation that mice that result from early
blastomeres being added, subtracted, and recombined are phenotypically
normal with respect to LR asymmetry. Thus, it is commonly thought that,
at least in mammals, LR decisions have to be made rather late in
development (e.g., after the blastocyst stage).
There is, however, an interesting set of observations that suggest
that, even in mammals, chirality is determined as early as the first
few cell divisions, and certainly before the streak appears.
Nonconjoined monozygotic twins, while not exhibiting the kinds of
visceral laterality defects that occur in conjoined twins, do manifest
many subtler kinds of mirror-image asymmetry. Pairs of such twins have
been noted to present mirror asymmetries in hand preference, hair whorl
direction, tooth patterns, unilateral eye and ear defects, and even
tumor locations and undescended testicles (Newman et al. 1937
; Gedda et
al. 1981
; Yager 1984
; Carton and Rees 1987
; Beere et al. 1990
; Townsend
and Richards 1990
; Morison et al. 1994
; Cidis et al. 1997
). Most
healthy, nonconjoined twins presumably result from separation of
cleavage, morula, or early blastocyst stage embryos (James 1983
): It is
much easier to imagine the splitting of a two-cell embryo rather than a
complex structure such as the egg cylinder (twinning at that late stage would seem likely to yield conjoined or incompletely patterned twins).
Thus, some chiral information may be present in the very early
mammalian embryo, manifesting itself in hair whorls, etc., if the cells
are separated at an early stage. In contrast, the asymmetry of the
major body organs seems to be unspecified (or at least plastic enough
to be respecified) at those stages, and is developed correctly for both
monozygotic twins. This may be related to the fact that heterotaxic
reversals in hair whorls and tooth patterns would not be expected to be
disadvantageous, whereas discordant situs for internal organs
clearly is subject to negative evolutionary pressure. In any case,
understanding the evolutionary and developmental origin of LR
information in various species is likely to be an extremely important
and exciting piece of the puzzle of embryonic development.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
1 Corresponding author.
E-MAIL mmercola{at}warren.med.harvard.edu; FAX (617) 432-1144.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-family member lefty in mouse embryos.
Nature
381:
151-155[CrossRef][Medline]. 

. 1998. Left-right asymmetry in animal development. Annu.
Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. (in press). This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. D. Bunney, A. H. De Boer, and M. Levin Fusicoccin signaling reveals 14-3-3 protein function as a novel step in left-right patterning during amphibian embryogenesis Development, October 15, 2003; 130(20): 4847 - 4858. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Ibanez-Tallon, N. Heintz, and H. Omran To beat or not to beat: roles of cilia in development and disease Hum. Mol. Genet., April 2, 2003; 12(90001): R27 - 35. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Chang, C. W. Brown, and M. M. Matzuk Genetic Analysis of the Mammalian Transforming Growth Factor-{beta} Superfamily Endocr. Rev., December 1, 2002; 23(6): 787 - 823. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. E. C. Sommer, N. F. Ramsey, R. C. W. Mandl, and R. S. Kahn Language lateralization in monozygotic twin pairs concordant and discordant for handedness Brain, December 1, 2002; 125(12): 2710 - 2718. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Patterson, T. Drysdale, and P. Krieg Embryonic origins of spleen asymmetry Development, January 1, 2000; 127(1): 167 - 175. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Adachi, Y. Saijoh, K. Mochida, S. Ohishi, H. Hashiguchi, A. Hirao, and H. Hamada Determination of left/right asymmetric expression of nodal by a left side-specific enhancer with sequence similarity to a lefty-2 enhancer Genes & Dev., June 15, 1999; 13(12): 1589 - 1600. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Saijoh, H. Adachi, K. Mochida, S. Ohishi, A. Hirao, and H. Hamada Distinct transcriptional regulatory mechanisms underlie left-right asymmetric expression of lefty-1 and lefty-2 Genes & Dev., February 1, 1999; 13(3): 259 - 269. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
D. Supp, M Brueckner, M. Kuehn, D. Witte, L. Lowe, J McGrath, J Corrales, and S. Potter Targeted deletion of the ATP binding domain of left-right dynein confirms its role in specifying development of left-right asymmetries Development, January 12, 1999; 126(23): 5495 - 5504. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M Levin and M Mercola Gap junction-mediated transfer of left-right patterning signals in the early chick blastoderm is upstream of Shh asymmetry in the node Development, January 11, 1999; 126(21): 4703 - 4714. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Depew, J. Liu, J. Long, R Presley, J. Meneses, R. Pedersen, and J. Rubenstein Dlx5 regulates regional development of the branchial arches and sensory capsules Development, January 9, 1999; 126(17): 3831 - 3846. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Osada and C. Wright Xenopus nodal-related signaling is essential for mesendodermal patterning during early embryogenesis Development, January 6, 1999; 126(14): 3229 - 3240. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H.S. Baldwin and M. Artman Recent advances in cardiovascular development: promise for the future Cardiovasc Res, December 1, 1998; 40(3): 456 - 468. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||