header logo image header logo text
Downloads Login
Research
General Information
ZIRC
ZFIN ID: ZDB-FISH-150901-14025
Fish name: dmdta222a/ta222a
Genotype: dmdta222a/ta222a
Targeting Reagent: none
HUMAN DISEASE MODELED by dmdta222a/ta222a
Human Disease Conditions Citations
muscular dystrophy control Li et al., 2015
Duchenne muscular dystrophy control Goody et al., 2017
standard conditions (6)
GENE EXPRESSION
Gene expression in dmdta222a/ta222a
Reporter gene expression No data available
PHENOTYPE
Phenotype in dmdta222a/ta222a
Phenotype Conditions Figures
cellular calcium ion homeostasis process quality, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 8 from Waugh et al., 2014
cellular calcium ion homeostasis process quality, normal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. 8 from Waugh et al., 2014
fast muscle cell detached from myoseptum, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Sztal et al., 2012
fast muscle cell mitochondrion swollen, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 6 from Schiavone et al., 2017
muscle broken, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 with imageFig. 5 with image from Johnson et al., 2013
muscle broken, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 5 with image from Johnson et al., 2013
muscle damaged, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 from Sztal et al., 2012
muscle decreased functionality, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Li et al., 2014
muscle decreased strength, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Li et al., 2014
muscle disorganized, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 from Li et al., 2014
muscle dystrophic, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 from Sztal et al., 2012
Fig. 1 with image from Winder et al., 2011
muscle organization quality, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 with image from Winder et al., 2011
muscle refractivity, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 with image from Vieira et al., 2015
muscle structure, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 with image from Vågberg et al., 2015
Fig. 1Fig. 4 from Li et al., 2014
muscle mitochondrial crista decreased amount, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 from Schiavone et al., 2017
muscle mitochondrial crista morphology, ameliorated chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A derivative Fig. 4 from Schiavone et al., 2017
muscle mitochondrial matrix decreased mass density, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 from Schiavone et al., 2017
muscle mitochondrion increased size, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4Fig. 5 from Schiavone et al., 2017
muscle mitochondrion morphology, ameliorated chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A derivative Fig. 5 from Schiavone et al., 2017
muscle myofibril patchy, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 with image from Vågberg et al., 2015
muscle contraction process quality, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Li et al., 2014
musculoskeletal movement magnitude, normal standard conditions Fig. 6 from Smith et al., 2017
myotome broken, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 with image from Johnson et al., 2013
myotome refractivity, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 from Sztal et al., 2012
myotome sarcomere malformed, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 3 with image from Vieira et al., 2017
myotome skeletal muscle cell decreased amount, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 with image from Jacoby et al., 2009
myotome skeletal muscle cell degeneration, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 with image from Jacoby et al., 2009
myotome skeletal muscle cell ab-f59 labeling spatial pattern, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 3 with image from Vieira et al., 2017
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril disorganized, abnormal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. S3 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril disorganized, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 3Fig. 4 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril increased fragility, abnormal control Fig. 6 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril increased fragility, abnormal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. 6 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril malformed, abnormal control Fig. 7 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril morphology, normal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. 7 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril organized, normal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. 3 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril organized, normal chemical treatment: ergotamine Fig. 3 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril organized, normal chemical treatment: serotonin Fig. 3 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal muscle myofibril organized, normal chemical treatment: pergolide Fig. 3 from Waugh et al., 2014
myotome skeletal myofibril assembly decreased process quality, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 3 with image from Vieira et al., 2017
Fig. 7 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
myotome skeletal myofibril assembly process quality, ameliorated chemical treatment: dasatinib (anhydrous) Fig. 7 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
skeletal muscle atrophied, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle broken, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle broken, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle broken, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle broken, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle broken, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle decreased strength, abnormal control Fig. 4 with imageFig. 5 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle decreased strength, abnormal chemical treatment: toluene-4-sulfonamide Fig. 4 with imageFig. 5 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle deformed, abnormal chemical treatment: toluene-4-sulfonamide Fig. 1 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle disorganized, abnormal control Fig. 1 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle disorganized, ameliorated chemical treatment: toluene-4-sulfonamide Fig. 1 with imageFig. 5 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle dystrophic, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle dystrophic, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle dystrophic, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle dystrophic, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle dystrophic, normal chemical treatment: pharmaceutical Fig. 2 from Kawahara et al., 2014
skeletal muscle increased accumulation skeletal muscle cell fibrillar collagen trimer, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle structure, abnormal control Fig. 1 with imageFig. 3 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle structure, ameliorated chemical treatment: toluene-4-sulfonamide Fig. 1 with imageFig. 3 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle myofibril attachment quality skeletal muscle muscle tendon junction, ameliorated chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A derivative Fig. 4Fig. 5 from Schiavone et al., 2017
skeletal muscle myofibril detached from skeletal muscle muscle tendon junction, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4Fig. 5 from Schiavone et al., 2017
skeletal muscle neutrophil aggregated, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle neutrophil present, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 4 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle adaptation disrupted, abnormal standard conditions text only from Widrick et al., 2016
skeletal muscle cell alignment skeletal muscle, abnormal chemical treatment: toluene-4-sulfonamide Fig. 1 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle cell broken, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 6 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle cell damaged, abnormal control Fig. 5 with image from Goody et al., 2017
skeletal muscle cell damaged, exacerbated viral treatment by injection: unidentified influenza virus Fig. 5 with image from Goody et al., 2017
skeletal muscle cell degenerate, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 5 with image from Goody et al., 2017
Fig. 2 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle cell degenerate, exacerbated viral treatment by injection: unidentified influenza virus Fig. 5 with image from Goody et al., 2017
skeletal muscle cell detached from myoseptum, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 from Sztal et al., 2012
skeletal muscle cell disorganized, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 with image from Li et al., 2015
Fig. 4 with image from Vieira et al., 2015
skeletal muscle cell increased variability of size, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2Fig. 3 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle cell undulate, abnormal chemical treatment: toluene-4-sulfonamide Fig. 1 with image from Li et al., 2015
skeletal muscle cell myofibril increased contractility, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle cell nucleus mislocalised, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 3 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle cell sarcolemma increased permeability, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 5 from Waugh et al., 2014
skeletal muscle cell sarcolemma permeability, normal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. 5 from Waugh et al., 2014
skeletal muscle fiber development disrupted, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2Fig. 3 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal muscle satellite cell proliferation increased occurrence, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 5 from Berger et al., 2010
skeletal myofibril assembly decreased process quality, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 3Fig. 4 from Waugh et al., 2014
skeletal myofibril assembly decreased process quality, abnormal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. S3 from Waugh et al., 2014
skeletal myofibril assembly process quality, normal chemical treatment: serotonin Fig. 3 from Waugh et al., 2014
skeletal myofibril assembly process quality, normal chemical treatment: pergolide Fig. 3 from Waugh et al., 2014
skeletal myofibril assembly process quality, normal chemical treatment: ergotamine Fig. 3 from Waugh et al., 2014
skeletal myofibril assembly process quality, normal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. 3 from Waugh et al., 2014
slow muscle cell detached from myoseptum, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 2 from Sztal et al., 2012
slow muscle cell mitochondrion morphology, normal standard conditions Fig. 6 from Schiavone et al., 2017
swimming decreased occurrence, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 3 with image from Vieira et al., 2017
Fig. 8 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
swimming occurrence, ameliorated chemical treatment: dasatinib (anhydrous) Fig. 8 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
tonic skeletal muscle contraction decreased intensity, abnormal standard conditions text only from Widrick et al., 2016
trunk musculature membrane damage, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 3 with image from Smith et al., 2015
trunk musculature relaxation of muscle increased duration, abnormal standard conditions text only from Widrick et al., 2016
trunk musculature sarcomere decreased diameter, abnormal standard conditions text only from Widrick et al., 2016
trunk musculature sarcomere decreased length, abnormal standard conditions text only from Widrick et al., 2016
trunk musculature sarcomere increased diameter, abnormal standard conditions text only from Widrick et al., 2016
twitch skeletal muscle contraction decreased intensity, abnormal standard conditions text only from Widrick et al., 2016
twitch skeletal muscle contraction increased duration, abnormal standard conditions text only from Widrick et al., 2016
vertical myoseptum physical object quality, abnormal control Fig. 7 from Waugh et al., 2014
vertical myoseptum physical object quality, abnormal chemical treatment: fluoxetine Fig. 7 from Waugh et al., 2014
whole organism dag1 expression amount, ameliorated chemical treatment: N-benzyloxycarbonyl-L-leucyl-L-leucyl-L-leucinal Fig. 6 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
whole organism dag1 expression amount, ameliorated chemical treatment: dasatinib (anhydrous) Fig. 5 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
whole organism dead, abnormal chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism dead, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism dag1 expression decreased amount, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 1 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
whole organism dag1 expression decreased amount, abnormal chemical treatment: dasatinib (anhydrous) Fig. 5 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
whole organism decreased life span, abnormal chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism decreased life span, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism decreased life span, exacerbated viral treatment by injection: unidentified influenza virus Fig. 5 with image from Goody et al., 2017
whole organism immobile, abnormal chemical treatment: toluene-4-sulfonamide text only from Li et al., 2015
whole organism dag1 expression increased amount, abnormal chemical treatment: N-benzyloxycarbonyl-L-leucyl-L-leucyl-L-leucinal Fig. 6 with image from Lipscomb et al., 2016
whole organism life span, ameliorated chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism refractivity, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
Fig. 1 with image from Winder et al., 2011
whole organism refractivity, abnormal chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism refractivity, ameliorated chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A derivative Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism respiratory gaseous exchange by respiratory system process quality, abnormal standard conditions Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism respiratory gaseous exchange by respiratory system process quality, abnormal chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017
whole organism respiratory gaseous exchange by respiratory system process quality, ameliorated chemical treatment by environment: cyclosporin A derivative Fig. 7 from Schiavone et al., 2017

CITATIONS  (28)