Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17277365›Full record

ArticleGenetics2007

How repeatable are associations between polymorphisms in achaete-scute and bristle number variation in Drosophila?

Jonathan D Gruber, Anne Genissel, Stuart J Macdonald, Anthony D Long

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. XRCC5 as a risk gene for alcohol dependence: evidence from a genome-wide gene-set-based analysis and follow-up studies in Drosophila and humans.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2015
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The genetics of inbreeding depression.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2009
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jonathan D GruberDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Irvine, California 92697, USA. gruberjd@uci.edu
Anne Genissel
Stuart J Macdonald
Anthony D Long

Funding

Biomedical Informatics Training ProgramT15LM007443 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI BALDI, PIERRE · 2002 to 2012
$9.3M
USING DISEQUILIBRIUM MAPPING TO DISSECT COMPLEX TRAITSR01GM058564 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IRVINE · PI LONG, ANTHONY DOUGLAS · 1999 to 2003
$536k
NIGMS NIH HHS GM-58564NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM058564NLM NIH HHS 5T15LM007443NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007443
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, the relevance of common genetic variants--particularly those significantly associated with phenotypic variation in laboratory studies--to standing phenotypic variation in the wild is poorly understood. To address this, we quantified the relationship between achaete-scute complex (ASC) polymorphisms and Drosophila bristle number phenotypes in several new population samples. MC22 is a biallelic, nonrepetitive-length polymorphism 97 bp downstream of the scute transcript. It has been previously shown to be associated with sternopleural bristle number variation in both sexes in a set of isogenic lines. We replicated this association in a large cohort of wild-caught Drosophila melanogaster. We also detected a significant association at MC22 in an outbred population maintained under laboratory conditions for approximately 25 years, but the phenotypic effects in this sample were opposite from the direction estimated in the initial study. Finally, no significant associations were detected in a second large wild-caught cohort or in a set of 134 nearly isogenic lines. Our ability to repeat the initial association in wild samples suggests that it was not spurious. Nevertheless, inconsistent results from the other three panels suggest that the relationship between polymorphic genetic markers and loci contributing to continuous variation is not a simple one.

Indexed as

Genes, InsectAnimalsAnimal StructuresAnimals, WildBase SequenceBasic Helix-Loop-Helix ProteinsCaliforniaDNADNA-Binding ProteinsDrosophila melanogasterDrosophila ProteinsEnvironmentEpistasis, GeneticFemaleGenetics, PopulationGenetic Variationac protein, DrosophilaBasic Helix-Loop-Helix ProteinsDNADNA-Binding ProteinsDrosophila Proteinssc protein, DrosophilaTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID17277365
PMCPMC1855119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.