Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Mar 15.
Published in final edited form as: Science. 2010 May 6;328(5983):1285–1288. doi: 10.1126/science.1189095

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

EFF-1–dependent retraction of branches. (A, B, D, and E) Time-lapse confocal projections of L4 and young-adult animals. (A) Growth of a wild-type menorah (movie S3). Growing tertiary branches (arrows). (B) Retraction of branches in des-2p::EFF-1 animal (arrowheads). (C) Number of branches growing and retracting in des-2p::EFF-1 and wild type. Branches first showed dynamic movements but eventually either shortened or lengthened (dynamic branching ending with growth or retraction). **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.05, two-tailed t test. Data shown as mean ± SE. Wild type, n = 3; des-2p::EFF-1, n = 2. (D) L4 eff-1(hy21ts) at 25°C, branches were static. (E) Retracting branch in L4 eff-1(hy21ts) grown at 25°C and shifted to 15°C for 4 hours (arrowhead; movie S1). (F) Number of branches showing growth and retraction in eff-1(hy21) grown at 25°C and downshifted as in (E). *P < 0.001, **P < 0.01, two-tailed t test. Data are mean ± SE. eff-1(hy21) 25°C, n = 3; eff-1(hy21) 25° to 15°C, n = 4 animals. (G) Wild-type branches grew (0.8 nm/s; N = 5 branches) and retracted (0.9 nm/s; N = 3 branches). In eff-1(hy21) temperature-shifted animals, branches retracted (0.9 nm/s; N = 10 branches). Data are mean ± SE. Scale bars represent 5 μm.