ArticleGenetics2011
The effects of weak genetic perturbations on the transcriptome of the wing imaginal disc and its association with wing shape in Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in Genetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does 3D Phenotyping Yield Substantial Insights in the Genetics of the Mouse Mandible Shape?G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2016Article
- Causes and consequences of genetic background effects illuminated by integrative genomic analysis.Genetics · 2014Article
- Regulation of BMP activity and range in Drosophila wing development.Current opinion in cell biology · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A major objective of genomics is to elucidate the mapping between genotypic and phenotypic space as a step toward understanding how small changes in gene function can lead to elaborate phenotypic changes. One approach that has been utilized is to examine overall patterns of covariation between phenotypic variables of interest, such as morphology, physiology, and behavior, and underlying aspects of gene activity, in particular transcript abundance on a genome-wide scale. Numerous studies have demonstrated that such patterns of covariation occur, although these are often between samples with large numbers of unknown genetic differences (different strains or even species) or perturbations of large effect (sexual dimorphism or strong loss-of-function mutations) that may represent physiological changes outside of the normal experiences of the organism. We used weak mutational perturbations in genes affecting wing development in Drosophila melanogaster that influence wing shape relative to a co-isogenic wild type. We profiled transcription of 1150 genes expressed during wing development in 27 heterozygous mutants, as well as their co-isogenic wild type and one additional wild-type strain. Despite finding clear evidence of expression differences between mutants and wild type, transcriptional profiles did not covary strongly with shape, suggesting that information from transcriptional profiling may not generally be predictive of final phenotype. We discuss these results in the light of possible attractor states of gene expression and how this would affect interpretation of covariation between transcriptional profiles and other phenotypes.
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.