Click here to close Hello! We notice that you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Xenbase and may cause the site to display incorrectly. We suggest using a current version of Chrome, FireFox, or Safari.

Summary Expression Phenotypes Gene Literature (3) GO Terms (0) Nucleotides (106) Proteins (26) Interactants (216) Wiki
XB-GENEPAGE-980471

Gene Symbol: cnrip1

Gene Name: cannabinoid receptor interacting protein 1

Anatomy terms
animal pole anterior anterior neural fold anterior neural tube brain cement gland primordium central nervous system chordal neural plate ectoderm endomesoderm eye forebrain head hindbrain midbrain neural plate ... [+]
Anatomy stages
NF stage 10 to NF stage 64
RNA-Seq and EST Transcriptome profiles tropicalis laevis.L laevis.S
Gurdon EST 1012079318 1012782106
Unigene EST Profile Str.65547 Xl.28904
RNA-Seq stage profile Data from Owens et al. 2016 Data from Session et al. 2016 Data from Session et al. 2016
GEO data cnrip1.L cnrip1.S
Microarray Data Data from Yanai et al. 2011 Data from Yanai et al. 2011 Data from Yanai et al. 2011
Stage and Tissue Profiles
                    Source: Owens et al. 2016 (tropicalis)
                    Source: Session et al. 2016 (laevis)
          Source: Session et al. 2016 (laevis)
Experimental Regulation (via RNA-seq)


                                                            Source: Ding et al. 2017 (laevis)
Summary ImagesSort by:
Expression Image
NF stage 12
Good quality Poor quality
Expression Image
NF stage 19
Good quality Poor quality
Expression Image
NF stage 25
Good quality Poor quality
Expression Image
NF stage 33 and 34
Good quality Poor quality
  
Literature ImagesSort by:
Expression Image
NF stage 12
Zheng, et al. 2015
Good quality Poor quality
Expression Image
NF stage 19
Zheng, et al. 2015
Good quality Poor quality
Expression Image
NF stage 25
Zheng, et al. 2015
Good quality Poor quality
Expression Image
NF stage 10.5 to NF stage 33 and 34
Zheng, et al. 2015
Good quality Poor quality
Expression Image
NF stage 33 and 34
Zheng, et al. 2015
Good quality Poor quality