Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21474300›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in genetics & development2011

Sex determination in insects: a binary decision based on alternative splicing.

Helen K Salz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in genetics & development, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

96 citing papers in PubMed, 163 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Impact of alternative splicing on Arabidopsis proteome.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Finishing the egg.Genetics · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Helen K SalzDepartment of Genetics, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106-4955, USA. hks@case.edu
Case Western Reserve University · US

Funding

Regulation of Sex-lethal pre-mRNA splicing during Drosophila developmentR01GM061039 · NIGMS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI SALZ, HELEN KAREN · 2002 to 2010
$2.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM061039
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The gene regulatory networks that control sex determination vary between species. Despite these differences, comparative studies in insects have found that alternative splicing is reiteratively used in evolution to control expression of the key sex-determining genes. Sex determination is best understood in Drosophila where activation of the RNA binding protein-encoding gene Sex-lethal is the central female-determining event. Sex-lethal serves as a genetic switch because once activated it controls its own expression by a positive feedback splicing mechanism. Sex fate choice in is also maintained by self-sustaining positive feedback splicing mechanisms in other dipteran and hymenopteran insects, although different RNA binding protein-encoding genes function as the binary switch. Studies exploring the mechanisms of sex-specific splicing have revealed the extent to which sex determination is integrated with other developmental regulatory networks.

Indexed as

Alternative SplicingAnimalsDrosophila melanogasterFeedback, PhysiologicalFemaleGene Expression Regulation, DevelopmentalMaleRNA, MessengerSex Determination ProcessesRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID21474300
PMCPMC3134629
OpenAlexW1968217820

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.