Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21679422›Full record

ArticleBMC biotechnology2011

RNA interference in marine and freshwater sponges: actin knockdown in Tethya wilhelma and Ephydatia muelleri by ingested dsRNA expressing bacteria.

Ajna S Rivera, Jörg U Hammel, Karri M Haen, Elizabeth S Danka, Brandon Cieniewicz, Ian P Winters, Dora Posfai, Gert Wörheide, Dennis V Lavrov, Scott W Knight and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC biotechnology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Ajna S RiveraDepartment of Biology, University of Richmond, Richmond, VA, USA.
Jörg U Hammel
Karri M Haen
Elizabeth S Danka
Brandon Cieniewicz
Ian P Winters
Dora Posfai
Gert Wörheide
Dennis V Lavrov
Scott W Knight
Malcolm S Hill
April L Hill
Michael Nickel
University of Richmond · USFriedrich Schiller University Jena · DEIowa State University · USLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DESigma Research (United States) · USUniversity of the Pacific · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe marine sponge Tethya wilhelma and the freshwater sponge Ephydatia muelleri are emerging model organisms to study evolution, gene regulation, development, and physiology in non-bilaterian animal systems. Thus far, functional methods (i.e., loss or gain of function) for these organisms have not been available.

resultsWe show that soaking developing freshwater sponges in double-stranded RNA and/or feeding marine and freshwater sponges bacteria expressing double-stranded RNA can lead to RNA interference and reduction of targeted transcript levels. These methods, first utilized in C. elegans, have been adapted for the development and feeding style of easily cultured marine and freshwater poriferans. We demonstrate phenotypic changes result from 'knocking down' expression of the actin gene.

conclusionThis technique provides an easy, efficient loss-of-function manipulation for developmental and gene regulatory studies in these important non-bilaterian animals.

Indexed as

RNA InterferenceActinsAnimalsAquatic OrganismsEscherichia coliFeeding BehaviorFresh WaterGene Expression ProfilingGene Knockdown TechniquesHistocytochemistryMicroscopy, ConfocalPoriferaRNA, Double-StrandedSeawaterActinsRNA, Double-Stranded

Identifiers

PMID21679422
PMCPMC3146823
OpenAlexW2028213245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.