Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21829563›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

Differential gene expression in the siphonophore Nanomia bijuga (Cnidaria) assessed with multiple next-generation sequencing workflows.

Stefan Siebert, Mark D Robinson, Sophia C Tintori, Freya Goetz, Rebecca R Helm, Stephen A Smith, Nathan Shaner, Steven H D Haddock, Casey W Dunn

Open access · goldAbstract read
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 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
11.1field-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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The histology of Nanomia bijuga (Hydrozoa: Siphonophora).Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution · 2015
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Phylogenetic analysis of gene expression.Integrative and comparative biology · 2013
    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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Stefan SiebertDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America. stefan_siebert@brown.edu
Mark D Robinson
Sophia C Tintori
Freya Goetz
Rebecca R Helm
Stephen A Smith
Nathan Shaner
Steven H D Haddock
Casey W Dunn
Brown University · USMonterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute · USGarvan Institute of Medical Research · AUHeidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We investigated differential gene expression between functionally specialized feeding polyps and swimming medusae in the siphonophore Nanomia bijuga (Cnidaria) with a hybrid long-read/short-read sequencing strategy. We assembled a set of partial gene reference sequences from long-read data (Roche 454), and generated short-read sequences from replicated tissue samples that were mapped to the references to quantify expression. We collected and compared expression data with three short-read expression workflows that differ in sample preparation, sequencing technology, and mapping tools. These workflows were Illumina mRNA-Seq, which generates sequence reads from random locations along each transcript, and two tag-based approaches, SOLiD SAGE and Helicos DGE, which generate reads from particular tag sites. Differences in expression results across workflows were mostly due to the differential impact of missing data in the partial reference sequences. When all 454-derived gene reference sequences were considered, Illumina mRNA-Seq detected more than twice as many differentially expressed (DE) reference sequences as the tag-based workflows. This discrepancy was largely due to missing tag sites in the partial reference that led to false negatives in the tag-based workflows. When only the subset of reference sequences that unambiguously have tag sites was considered, we found broad congruence across workflows, and they all identified a similar set of DE sequences. Our results are promising in several regards for gene expression studies in non-model organisms. First, we demonstrate that a hybrid long-read/short-read sequencing strategy is an effective way to collect gene expression data when an annotated genome sequence is not available. Second, our replicated sampling indicates that expression profiles are highly consistent across field-collected animals in this case. Third, the impacts of partial reference sequences on the ability to detect DE can be mitigated through workflow choice and deeper reference sequencing.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingAnimalsCnidariaDatabases, GeneticIn Situ HybridizationOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRNA, MessengerSequence Analysis, DNASoftwareRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID21829563
PMCPMC3146525
OpenAlexW2072741498

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.