4.2 Article

Large-scale screen for genes controlling mammalian embryogenesis, using high-throughput gene expression analysis in mouse embryos

期刊

MECHANISMS OF DEVELOPMENT
卷 98, 期 1-2, 页码 77-93

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0925-4773(00)00453-6

关键词

mouse; embryogenesis; organogenesis; gene expression analysis; in situ hybridization; high-throughput gene identification; functional genomics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have adapted the whole-mount in situ hybridization technique to perform high-throughput gene expression analysis in mouse embryos. A large-scale screen for genes showing specific expression patterns in the mid-gestation embryo was carried out, and a large number of genes controlling development were isolated. From 35 760 clones of a 9.5 d.p.c. cDNA library, a total of 5348 cDNAs, enriched for rare transcripts, were selected and analyzed by whole-mount in situ hybridization. Four hundred and twenty-eight clones revealed specific expression patterns in the 9.5 d.p.c. embryo. Of 361 tag-sequenced clones, 198 (55%) represent 154 known mouse genes. Thirty-nine (25%) of the known genes are involved in transcriptional regulation and 33 (21%) in inter- or intracellular signaling. A large number of these genes have been shown to play an important role in embryogenesis. Furthermore, 24 (16%) of the known genes are implicated in human disorders and three others altered in classical mouse mutations. Similar proportions of regulators of embryonic development and candidates for human disorders or mouse mutations are expected among the 163 new mouse genes isolated. Thus, high-throughput gene expression analysis is suitable for isolating regulators of embryonic development on a large-scale, and in the long term, for determining the molecular anatomy of the mouse embryo. This knowledge will provide a basis for the systematic investigation of pattern formation, tissue differentiation and organogenesis in mammals. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据