Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22251873›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2012

Dosage compensation in Drosophila melanogaster: epigenetic fine-tuning of chromosome-wide transcription.

Thomas Conrad, Asifa Akhtar

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 160 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
160citing 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

160 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Polygenic response of sex chromosomes to sexual antagonism.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

100 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

2 authors.

Thomas ConradMax Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics, Stübeweg 51, 79108 Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.
Asifa Akhtar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dosage compensation is an epigenetic mechanism that normalizes gene expression from unequal copy numbers of sex chromosomes. Different organisms have evolved alternative molecular solutions to this task. In Drosophila melanogaster, transcription of the single male X chromosome is upregulated by twofold in a process orchestrated by the dosage compensation complex. Despite this conceptual simplicity, dosage compensation involves multiple coordinated steps to recognize and activate the entire X chromosome. We are only beginning to understand the intriguing interplay between multiple levels of local and long-range chromatin regulation required for the fine-tuned transcriptional activation of a heterogeneous gene population. This Review highlights the known facts and open questions of dosage compensation in D. melanogaster.

Indexed as

Dosage Compensation, GeneticAnimalsDrosophila melanogasterEpigenesis, GeneticGene Expression RegulationTranscription, GeneticX Chromosome

Identifiers

PMID22251873

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.