Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21424276›Full record

ArticleGenetica2011

Population transcriptomics: insights from Drosophila simulans, Drosophila sechellia and their hybrids.

François Wurmser, David Ogereau, Tristan Mary-Huard, Béatrice Loriod, Dominique Joly, Catherine Montchamp-Moreau

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Genetica, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Neural divergence and hybrid disruption between ecologically isolatedProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

François WurmserLaboratoire Evolution, Génomes et Spéciation, CNRS UPR9034 Avenue de la Terrasse, Gif-sur-Yvette F-91198 Cedex, and Univ Paris-Sud, 91405 Orsay, France. francois.wurmser@legs.cnrs-gif.fr
David Ogereau
Tristan Mary-Huard
Béatrice Loriod
Dominique Joly
Catherine Montchamp-Moreau

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sequence differentiation has been widely studied between populations and species, whereas interest in expression divergence is relatively recent. Using microarrays, we compared four geographically distinct populations of Drosophila simulans and a population of Drosophila sechellia, and interspecific hybrids. We observed few differences between populations, suggesting a slight population structure in D. simulans. This structure was observed in direct population comparisons, as well as in interspecific comparisons (hybrids vs. parents, D. sechellia vs. D. simulans). Expression variance is higher in the French and Zimbabwean populations than in the populations from the ancestral range of D. simulans (Kenya and Seychelles). This suggests a large scale phenomenon of decanalization following the invasion of a new environment. Comparing D. simulans and D. sechellia, we revealed 304 consistently differentially expressed genes, with striking overrepresentation of genes of the cytochrome P450 family, which could be related to their role in detoxification as well as in hormone regulation. We also revealed differences in genes involved in Juvenile hormone and Dopamine differentiation. We finally observed very few differentially expressed genes between hybrids and parental populations, with an overrepresentation of X-linked genes.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingGenetics, PopulationAnimalsChimeraDrosophilaFemaleGene Expression RegulationGenetic VariationMale

Identifiers

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.