ArticleGenetics2009
Genomic consequences of background effects on scalloped mutant expressivity in the wing of Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in Genetics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pleiotropy, epistasis and the genetic architecture of quantitative traits.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2024Review
- A cis-regulatory sequence of the selector gene vestigial drives the evolution of wing scaling in Drosophila species.The Journal of experimental biology · 2023Article
- Intragenic compensation through the lens of deep mutational scanning.Biophysical reviews · 2022Review
- Rapid Intraspecies Evolution of Fitness Effects of Yeast Genes.Genome biology and evolution · 2022Article
- Macroscopic variation in Arabidopsis mutants despite stomatal uniformity across soil nutrient environments.Genetica · 2021Article
- Epistasis for head morphology in Drosophila melanogaster.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- Cryptic genetic variation in a heat shock protein modifies the outcome of a mutation affecting epidermal stem cell development in C. elegans.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Case Report: Interleukin-2 Receptor Common Gamma Chain Defect Presented as a Hyper-IgE Syndrome.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Article
- Genetic background impacts the timing of synaptonemal complex breakdown in Drosophila melanogaster.Chromosoma · 2020Article
- Unpredictable Effects of the Genetic Background of Transgenic Lines in Physiological Quantitative Traits.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Article
- How well do you know your mutation? Complex effects of genetic background on expressivity, complementation, and ordering of allelic effects.PLoS genetics · 2017Article
- The Interaction of Genetic Background and Mutational Effects in Regulation of Mouse Craniofacial Shape.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2017Article
- Article
- Forever Young: The Role of Ubiquitin Receptor DA1 and E3 Ligase BIG BROTHER in Controlling Leaf Growth and Development.Plant physiology · 2017Article
- Review
- A trans-acting Variant within the Transcription Factor RIM101 Interacts with Genetic Background to Determine its Regulatory Capacity.PLoS genetics · 2016Article
- As the fat flies: The dynamic lipid droplets of Drosophila embryos.Biochimica et biophysica acta · 2015Review
- Regulation of synaptic development and function by the Drosophila PDZ protein Dyschronic.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2014Article
- Article
- Causes and consequences of genetic background effects illuminated by integrative genomic analysis.Genetics · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Genetic background effects contribute to the phenotypic consequences of mutations and are pervasive across all domains of life that have been examined, yet little is known about how they modify genetic systems. In part this is due to the lack of tractable model systems that have been explicitly developed to study the genetic and evolutionary consequences of background effects. In this study we demonstrate that phenotypic expressivity of the scalloped(E3) (sd(E3)) mutation of Drosophila melanogaster is background dependent and is the result of at least one major modifier segregating between two standard lab wild-type strains. We provide evidence that at least one of the modifiers is linked to the vestigial region and demonstrate that the background effects modify the spatial distribution of known sd target genes in a genotype-dependent manner. In addition, microarrays were used to examine the consequences of genetic background effects on the global transcriptome. Expression differences between wild-type strains were found to be as large as or larger than the effects of mutations with substantial phenotypic effects, and expression differences between wild type and mutant varied significantly between genetic backgrounds. Significantly, we demonstrate that the epistatic interaction between sd(E3) and an optomotor blind mutation is background dependent. The results are discussed within the context of developing a complex but more realistic view of the consequences of genetic background effects with respect to mutational analysis and studies of epistasis and cryptic genetic variation segregating in natural populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.