Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21754989›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

Comparative genomic analysis of Drosophila melanogaster and vector mosquito developmental genes.

Susanta K Behura, Morgan Haugen, Ellen Flannery, Joseph Sarro, Charles R Tessier, David W Severson, Molly Duman-Scheel

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. A single-nucleus transcriptomic atlas of the adultbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. eLife · 2019
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Susanta K BehuraDepartment of Biological Sciences and Eck Institute for Global Health, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, United States of America.
Morgan Haugen
Ellen Flannery
Joseph Sarro
Charles R Tessier
David W Severson
Molly Duman-Scheel
Indiana University School of MedicineUniversity of Notre Dame · USIndiana University · US

Funding

Molecular Genetics of Dengue Resistance in MosquitoesR01AI059342 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME · PI SEVERSON, DAVID W · 2004 to 2008
$3.2M
Diapause in Culex MosquitoesR01AI079125 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME · PI SEVERSON, DAVID W · 2009 to 2013
$3.0M
Analysis of the functions of axon guidance genes during vector mosquito developmeR01AI081795 · NIAID · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI SCHEEL, MOLLY DUMAN · 2009 to 2012
$1.5M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI059342NIAID NIH HHS R01-AI059342NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI079125NIAID NIH HHS R01-AI079125NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI081795NIAID NIH HHS R01-AI081795-02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome sequencing projects have presented the opportunity for analysis of developmental genes in three vector mosquito species: Aedes aegypti, Culex quinquefasciatus, and Anopheles gambiae. A comparative genomic analysis of developmental genes in Drosophila melanogaster and these three important vectors of human disease was performed in this investigation. While the study was comprehensive, special emphasis centered on genes that 1) are components of developmental signaling pathways, 2) regulate fundamental developmental processes, 3) are critical for the development of tissues of vector importance, 4) function in developmental processes known to have diverged within insects, and 5) encode microRNAs (miRNAs) that regulate developmental transcripts in Drosophila. While most fruit fly developmental genes are conserved in the three vector mosquito species, several genes known to be critical for Drosophila development were not identified in one or more mosquito genomes. In other cases, mosquito lineage-specific gene gains with respect to D. melanogaster were noted. Sequence analyses also revealed that numerous repetitive sequences are a common structural feature of Drosophila and mosquito developmental genes. Finally, analysis of predicted miRNA binding sites in fruit fly and mosquito developmental genes suggests that the repertoire of developmental genes targeted by miRNAs is species-specific. The results of this study provide insight into the evolution of developmental genes and processes in dipterans and other arthropods, serve as a resource for those pursuing analysis of mosquito development, and will promote the design and refinement of functional analysis experiments.

Indexed as

Disease VectorsAnimalsBase SequenceCell DeathCulicidaeDrosophila melanogasterEvolution, MolecularGene Expression Regulation, DevelopmentalGenes, InsectGenetic VariationGenomicsHumansMicroRNAsPhylogenyRepetitive Sequences, Amino AcidSignal TransductionMicroRNAs

Identifiers

PMID21754989
PMCPMC3130749
OpenAlexW2056621266

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.