%0 Figure %A Kazemian, Majid %A Blatti, Charles %A Richards, Adam %A McCutchan, Michael %A Wakabayashi-Ito, Noriko %A S. Hammonds, Ann %A E. Celniker, Susan %A Kumar, Sudhir %A A. Wolfe, Scot %A H. Brodsky, Michael %A Sinha, Saurabh %D 2010 %T Examples of how maternal and gap patterned TFs together give rise to patterned expression. %U https://plos.figshare.com/articles/figure/_Examples_of_how_maternal_and_gap_patterned_TFs_together_give_rise_to_patterned_expression_/507312 %R 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000456.g007 %2 https://plos.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/836950 %K maternal %K patterned %K tfs %X

Shown are nine sample CRMs, their expression domains (in pink) along the A/P axis (left: anterior), their regulators (as per the predicted regulatory network of Figure 6B), and their respective expression domains (in color code matching that of Figure 6B). Arrows indicate activation and barred lines indicate repressive influence. Repressor domains shown are required to be overlapping with an activator's domain of influence. Solid edges indicate that the regulatory influence is supported by previous experimental evidence in the literature, while dashed edges indicate novel interactions. Labels of TF expression domains are in black or white for better color contrast and have no semantic difference. *The edge between DSTAT and eve_stripe5 is not based on our model predictions (since DSTAT is broadly expressed and was not included in the model) but on the presence of DSTAT binding sites (motif score greater than 4 standard deviations above genomic mean) in the CRM.

%I PLOS Biology