310
Xenopus
Hellsten, U. et al. (2010) ‘The genome of the western clawed frog
Xenopus tropicalis’, Science, 328(5978), pp. 633–636. doi:
10.1126/science.1183670.
Jacks, T. et al. (1994) ‘Tumor spectrum analysis in p53-mutant
mice’, Current Biology, 4(1), pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1016/S09609822(00)00002-6.
Khokha, M. K. (2012) ‘Xenopus white papers and resources:
Folding functional genomics and genetics into the frog’, genesis, 50(3), pp. 133–142. doi: 10.1002/dvg.22015.
Kinkel, M. D. et al. (2010) ‘Intraperitoneal injection into adult
zebraf sh’, Journal of Visualized Experiments, 42, p. 2126.
doi: 10.3791/2126.
Komor, A. C. et al. (2016) ‘Programmable editing of a target base
in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage’,
Nature, 533(7603), pp. 420–424. doi: 10.1038/nature17946.
Konukiewitz, B. et al. (2017) ‘Somatostatin receptor expression
related to TP53 and RB1 alterations in pancreatic and extrapancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms with a Ki67-index
above 20%’, Modern Pathology, 30(4), pp. 587–598. doi:
10.1038/modpathol.2016.217.
Kühl, M. and Pandur, P. (2008) ‘Dorsal axis duplication as a functional readout for Wnt activity’, Methods in Molecular Biology,
469, pp. 467–476. doi: 10.1007/978-1-60327-469-29.
Letrado, P. et al. (2018) ‘Zebrafsh: Speeding up the cancer drug
discovery process’, Cancer Research, 78(21), pp. 6048–
6058. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-1029.
Lieschke, G. J. and Currie, P. D. (2007) ‘Animal models of human
disease: Zebrafsh swim into view’, Nature Reviews Genetics,
8(5), pp. 353–367. doi: 10.1038/nrg2091.
Lohmann, D. R. (1999) ‘RB1 gene mutations in retinoblastoma’,
Human Mutation, 14(4), pp. 283–288. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)10981004(199910)14:4<283::AID-HUMU2>3.0.CO;2-J.
Ma, Y. et al. (2010) ‘The relationship between early embryo
development and tumourigenesis’, Journal of Cellular and
Molecular Medicine, 14(12), pp. 2697–2701. doi: 10.1111/
j.1582-4934.2010.01191.x.
Maddalo, D. et al. (2014) ‘In vivo engineering of oncogenic chromosomal rearrangements with the CRISPR/Cas9 system’,
Nature, 516(7531), pp. 423–428. doi: 10.1038/nature13902.
Mirzoyan, Z. et al. (2019) ‘ Drosophila melanogaster: A model
organism to study cancer’, Frontiers in Genetics, 10, p. 51.
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.00051.
Moody, S. A. (1987) ‘Fates of the blastomeres of the 16-cell stage
Xenopus embryo’, Developmental Biology, 119(2), pp. 560–
578. doi: 10.1016/0012-1606(87)90059-5.
Naert, T. et al. (2016) ‘CRISPR/Cas9 mediated knockout of rb1 and
rbl1 leads to rapid and penetrant retinoblastoma development
in Xenopus tropicalis’, Scientif c Reports, 6(1), pp. 1–10. doi:
10.1038/srep35264.
Naert, T., Dimitrakopoulou, D., et al. (2020) ‘RBL1 (p107) functions as tumor suppressor in glioblastoma and small-cell pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma in Xenopus tropicalis’,
Oncogene, 39(13), pp. 2692–2706. doi: 10.1038/s41388020-1173-z.
Naert, T., Tulkens, D., et al. (2020) ‘Maximizing CRISPR/Cas9
phenotype penetrance applying predictive modeling of editing outcomes in Xenopus and zebrafsh embryos’, Scientif c
Reports, 10(1), p. 14662. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71412-0.
Naert, T. et al. (2021) ‘CRISPR-SID: Identifying EZH2 as a druggable target for desmoid tumors via in vivo dependency
mapping’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America. in press. doi: 10.1073/
pnas.2115116118.
Nakayama, T. et al. (2014) ‘Cas9-based genome editing in Xenopus
tropicalis’, The Use of CRISPR/cas9, ZFNs, TALENs in
Generating Site Specif c Genome Alterations, 546, pp. 355–
375. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-801185-0.00017-9.
Nemudryi, A. A. et al. (2014) ‘TALEN and CRISPR/Cas genome
editing systems: Tools of discovery’, Acta Naturae, 6(3),
pp. 19–40. doi: 10.32607/20758251-2014-6-3-19-40.
Noy, N. F. et al. (2009) ‘BioPortal: Ontologies and integrated data
resources at the click of a mouse’, Nucleic Acids Research,
37(Suppl. 2), pp. W170–W173. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp440.
Pegoraro, C. and Monsoro-Burq, A. H. (2013) ‘Signaling and transcriptional regulation in neural crest specifcation and migration: Lessons from xenopus embryos’, Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews: Developmental Biology, 2(2), pp. 247–259. doi:
10.1002/wdev.76.
Pennisi, E. (1998) ‘How a growth control path takes a wrong
turn to cancer’, Science, 281, pp. 1438–1441. doi: 10.1126/
science.281.5382.1438.
Postlethwait, J. H. et al. (2000) ‘Zebrafsh comparative genomics and the origins of vertebrate chromosomes’, Genome
Research, 10(12), pp. 1890–1902. doi: 10.1101/gr.164800.
Pugach, E. K. et al. (2010) ‘Retro-orbital injection in adult zebrafish’, Journal of Visualized Experiments, 34, p. e1645. doi:
10.3791/1645.
Rau, L., Cohen, N. and Robert, J. (2001) ‘MHC-restricted and
-unrestricted CD8 T cells: An evolutionary perspective’,
Transplantation, 72(11), pp. 1830–1835. doi: 10.1097/
00007890-200112150-00020.
Rau, L. et al. (2002) ‘Identifcation and characterization of Xenopus
CD8+ T cells expressing an NK cell-associated molecule’,
European Journal of Immunology, 32(6), pp. 1574–1583.
doi:10.1002/1521-4141(200206)32:6<1574::AID-IMMU1574>3.0.
CO;2-4.
Robanus-Maandag, E. et al. (1998) ‘p107 is a suppressor of retinoblastoma development in pRB-defcient mice’, Genes
and Development, 12(11), pp. 1599–1609. doi: 10.1101/
gad.12.11.1599.
Robert, J., Guiet, C. and du Pasquier, L. (1994) ‘Lymphoid tumors
of Xenopus laevis with different capacities for growth in larvae and adults’, Developmental Immunology, 3(4), pp. 297–
307. doi: 10.1155/1994/37392.
Robert, J., Guiet, C. and du Pasquier, L. (1995) ‘Ontogeny of
the alloimmune response against a transplanted tumor in
Xenopus laevis’, Differentiation, 59(3), pp. 135–144. doi:
10.1046/j.1432-0436.1995.5930135.x.
Robert, J. et al. (1997) ‘Effects of thymectomy and tolerance
induction on tumor immunity in adult Xenopus laevis’,
International Journal of Cancer, 70(3), pp. 330–334. doi:
10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19970127)70:3<330::AIDIJC14>3.0.CO;2-J.
Robert, J. and Ohta, Y. (2009) ‘Comparative and developmental
study of the immune system in Xenopus’, in Developmental
Dynamics, 238(6), pp. 1249–1270. doi: 10.1002/dvdy.21891.
Sakuma, T. et al. (2016) ‘MMEJ-assisted gene knock-in using
TALENs and CRISPR-Cas9 with the PITCh systems’, Nature
Protocols, 11(1), pp. 118–133. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2015.
140.
Sato, K. et al. (2018) ‘Flow cytometric analysis of Xenopus laevis
and X. tropicalis blood cells using acridine orange’, Scientif c
Reports, 8(1). doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-34631-0.
Schmitt, S. M., Gull, M. and Brändli, A. W. (2014) ‘Engineering
Xenopus embryos for phenotypic drug discovery screening’,
in Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 69–70, pp. 225–246.
doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2014.02.004.
Session, A. M. et al. (2016) ‘Genome evolution in the allotetraploid
frog Xenopus laevis’, Nature, 538(7625), pp. 336–343. doi:
10.1038/nature19840.
Xenopus
Hellsten, U. et al. (2010) ‘The genome of the western clawed frog
Xenopus tropicalis’, Science, 328(5978), pp. 633–636. doi:
10.1126/science.1183670.
Jacks, T. et al. (1994) ‘Tumor spectrum analysis in p53-mutant
mice’, Current Biology, 4(1), pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1016/S09609822(00)00002-6.
Khokha, M. K. (2012) ‘Xenopus white papers and resources:
Folding functional genomics and genetics into the frog’, genesis, 50(3), pp. 133–142. doi: 10.1002/dvg.22015.
Kinkel, M. D. et al. (2010) ‘Intraperitoneal injection into adult
zebraf sh’, Journal of Visualized Experiments, 42, p. 2126.
doi: 10.3791/2126.
Komor, A. C. et al. (2016) ‘Programmable editing of a target base
in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage’,
Nature, 533(7603), pp. 420–424. doi: 10.1038/nature17946.
Konukiewitz, B. et al. (2017) ‘Somatostatin receptor expression
related to TP53 and RB1 alterations in pancreatic and extrapancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms with a Ki67-index
above 20%’, Modern Pathology, 30(4), pp. 587–598. doi:
10.1038/modpathol.2016.217.
Kühl, M. and Pandur, P. (2008) ‘Dorsal axis duplication as a functional readout for Wnt activity’, Methods in Molecular Biology,
469, pp. 467–476. doi: 10.1007/978-1-60327-469-29.
Letrado, P. et al. (2018) ‘Zebrafsh: Speeding up the cancer drug
discovery process’, Cancer Research, 78(21), pp. 6048–
6058. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-1029.
Lieschke, G. J. and Currie, P. D. (2007) ‘Animal models of human
disease: Zebrafsh swim into view’, Nature Reviews Genetics,
8(5), pp. 353–367. doi: 10.1038/nrg2091.
Lohmann, D. R. (1999) ‘RB1 gene mutations in retinoblastoma’,
Human Mutation, 14(4), pp. 283–288. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)10981004(199910)14:4<283::AID-HUMU2>3.0.CO;2-J.
Ma, Y. et al. (2010) ‘The relationship between early embryo
development and tumourigenesis’, Journal of Cellular and
Molecular Medicine, 14(12), pp. 2697–2701. doi: 10.1111/
j.1582-4934.2010.01191.x.
Maddalo, D. et al. (2014) ‘In vivo engineering of oncogenic chromosomal rearrangements with the CRISPR/Cas9 system’,
Nature, 516(7531), pp. 423–428. doi: 10.1038/nature13902.
Mirzoyan, Z. et al. (2019) ‘ Drosophila melanogaster: A model
organism to study cancer’, Frontiers in Genetics, 10, p. 51.
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.00051.
Moody, S. A. (1987) ‘Fates of the blastomeres of the 16-cell stage
Xenopus embryo’, Developmental Biology, 119(2), pp. 560–
578. doi: 10.1016/0012-1606(87)90059-5.
Naert, T. et al. (2016) ‘CRISPR/Cas9 mediated knockout of rb1 and
rbl1 leads to rapid and penetrant retinoblastoma development
in Xenopus tropicalis’, Scientif c Reports, 6(1), pp. 1–10. doi:
10.1038/srep35264.
Naert, T., Dimitrakopoulou, D., et al. (2020) ‘RBL1 (p107) functions as tumor suppressor in glioblastoma and small-cell pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma in Xenopus tropicalis’,
Oncogene, 39(13), pp. 2692–2706. doi: 10.1038/s41388020-1173-z.
Naert, T., Tulkens, D., et al. (2020) ‘Maximizing CRISPR/Cas9
phenotype penetrance applying predictive modeling of editing outcomes in Xenopus and zebrafsh embryos’, Scientif c
Reports, 10(1), p. 14662. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71412-0.
Naert, T. et al. (2021) ‘CRISPR-SID: Identifying EZH2 as a druggable target for desmoid tumors via in vivo dependency
mapping’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America. in press. doi: 10.1073/
pnas.2115116118.
Nakayama, T. et al. (2014) ‘Cas9-based genome editing in Xenopus
tropicalis’, The Use of CRISPR/cas9, ZFNs, TALENs in
Generating Site Specif c Genome Alterations, 546, pp. 355–
375. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-801185-0.00017-9.
Nemudryi, A. A. et al. (2014) ‘TALEN and CRISPR/Cas genome
editing systems: Tools of discovery’, Acta Naturae, 6(3),
pp. 19–40. doi: 10.32607/20758251-2014-6-3-19-40.
Noy, N. F. et al. (2009) ‘BioPortal: Ontologies and integrated data
resources at the click of a mouse’, Nucleic Acids Research,
37(Suppl. 2), pp. W170–W173. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkp440.
Pegoraro, C. and Monsoro-Burq, A. H. (2013) ‘Signaling and transcriptional regulation in neural crest specifcation and migration: Lessons from xenopus embryos’, Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews: Developmental Biology, 2(2), pp. 247–259. doi:
10.1002/wdev.76.
Pennisi, E. (1998) ‘How a growth control path takes a wrong
turn to cancer’, Science, 281, pp. 1438–1441. doi: 10.1126/
science.281.5382.1438.
Postlethwait, J. H. et al. (2000) ‘Zebrafsh comparative genomics and the origins of vertebrate chromosomes’, Genome
Research, 10(12), pp. 1890–1902. doi: 10.1101/gr.164800.
Pugach, E. K. et al. (2010) ‘Retro-orbital injection in adult zebrafish’, Journal of Visualized Experiments, 34, p. e1645. doi:
10.3791/1645.
Rau, L., Cohen, N. and Robert, J. (2001) ‘MHC-restricted and
-unrestricted CD8 T cells: An evolutionary perspective’,
Transplantation, 72(11), pp. 1830–1835. doi: 10.1097/
00007890-200112150-00020.
Rau, L. et al. (2002) ‘Identifcation and characterization of Xenopus
CD8+ T cells expressing an NK cell-associated molecule’,
European Journal of Immunology, 32(6), pp. 1574–1583.
doi:10.1002/1521-4141(200206)32:6<1574::AID-IMMU1574>3.0.
CO;2-4.
Robanus-Maandag, E. et al. (1998) ‘p107 is a suppressor of retinoblastoma development in pRB-defcient mice’, Genes
and Development, 12(11), pp. 1599–1609. doi: 10.1101/
gad.12.11.1599.
Robert, J., Guiet, C. and du Pasquier, L. (1994) ‘Lymphoid tumors
of Xenopus laevis with different capacities for growth in larvae and adults’, Developmental Immunology, 3(4), pp. 297–
307. doi: 10.1155/1994/37392.
Robert, J., Guiet, C. and du Pasquier, L. (1995) ‘Ontogeny of
the alloimmune response against a transplanted tumor in
Xenopus laevis’, Differentiation, 59(3), pp. 135–144. doi:
10.1046/j.1432-0436.1995.5930135.x.
Robert, J. et al. (1997) ‘Effects of thymectomy and tolerance
induction on tumor immunity in adult Xenopus laevis’,
International Journal of Cancer, 70(3), pp. 330–334. doi:
10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19970127)70:3<330::AIDIJC14>3.0.CO;2-J.
Robert, J. and Ohta, Y. (2009) ‘Comparative and developmental
study of the immune system in Xenopus’, in Developmental
Dynamics, 238(6), pp. 1249–1270. doi: 10.1002/dvdy.21891.
Sakuma, T. et al. (2016) ‘MMEJ-assisted gene knock-in using
TALENs and CRISPR-Cas9 with the PITCh systems’, Nature
Protocols, 11(1), pp. 118–133. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2015.
140.
Sato, K. et al. (2018) ‘Flow cytometric analysis of Xenopus laevis
and X. tropicalis blood cells using acridine orange’, Scientif c
Reports, 8(1). doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-34631-0.
Schmitt, S. M., Gull, M. and Brändli, A. W. (2014) ‘Engineering
Xenopus embryos for phenotypic drug discovery screening’,
in Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 69–70, pp. 225–246.
doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2014.02.004.
Session, A. M. et al. (2016) ‘Genome evolution in the allotetraploid
frog Xenopus laevis’, Nature, 538(7625), pp. 336–343. doi:
10.1038/nature19840.