Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19182539›Full record

ReviewFly

Fruit flies and intellectual disability.

François V Bolduc, Tim Tully

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Fly. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. PDE-4 inhibition rescues aberrant synaptic plasticity in Drosophila and mouse models of fragile X syndrome.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2015
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Drosophila adult olfactory shock learning.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2014
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

2 authors.

François V BolducWatson School of Biological Sciences, Cold Spring Harbor, New York, USA.
Tim Tully

Funding

Functional Genomics of Drosophila Olfactory MemoryR01MH066910 · NIMH · COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY · PI TULLY, TIM P · 2003 to 2006
$1.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH066910
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mental retardation--known more commonly nowadays as intellectual disability--is a severe neurological condition affecting up to 3% of the general population. As a result of the analysis of familial cases and recent advances in clinical genetic testing, great strides have been made in our understanding of the genetic etiologies of mental retardation. Nonetheless, no treatment is currently clinically available to patients suffering from intellectual disability. Several animal models have been used in the study of memory and cognition. Established paradigms in Drosophila have recently captured cognitive defects in fly mutants for orthologs of genes involved in human intellectual disability. We review here three protocols designed to understand the molecular genetic basis of learning and memory in Drosophila and the genes identified so far with relation to mental retardation. In addition, we explore the mental retardation genes for which evidence of neuronal dysfunction other than memory has been established in Drosophila. Finally, we summarize the findings in Drosophila for mental retardation genes for which no neuronal information is yet available. All in all, this review illustrates the impressive overlap between genes identified in human mental retardation and genes involved in physiological learning and memory.

Indexed as

AnimalsBehavior, AnimalDrosophilaFemaleGenes, InsectHumansIntellectual DisabilityLearningMaleMemoryModels, AnimalModels, PsychologicalMutationPhenotypeSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID19182539
PMCPMC3045854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.