Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22784002›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2012

Cysteine peptidases and their inhibitors in Tetranychus urticae: a comparative genomic approach.

María Estrella Santamaría, Pedro Hernández-Crespo, Félix Ortego, Vojislava Grbic, Miodrag Grbic, Isabel Diaz, Manuel Martinez

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Plant Defenses AgainstPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Phytocystatins: Defense Proteins against Phytophagous Insects and Acari.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

María Estrella SantamaríaDepartment of Biology WSC 339/341, The University of Western Ontario, 1151 Richmond St, London, ON N6A 5B7, Canada.
Pedro Hernández-Crespo
Félix Ortego
Vojislava Grbic
Miodrag Grbic
Isabel Diaz
Manuel Martinez
Western University · CAConsejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas · ESCentre for Plant Biotechnology and Genomics · ESUniversidad Politécnica de Madrid · ES

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research OGI-046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCysteine peptidases in the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae are involved in essential physiological processes, including proteolytic digestion. Cystatins and thyropins are inhibitors of cysteine peptidases that modulate their activity, although their function in this species has yet to be investigated. Comparative genomic analyses are powerful tools to obtain advanced knowledge into the presence and evolution of both, peptidases and their inhibitors, and could aid to elucidate issues concerning the function of these proteins.

resultsWe have performed a genomic comparative analysis of cysteine peptidases and their inhibitors in T. urticae and representative species of different arthropod taxonomic groups. The results indicate: i) clade-specific proliferations are common to C1A papain-like peptidases and for the I25B cystatin family of inhibitors, whereas the C1A inhibitors thyropins are evolutionarily more conserved among arthropod clades; ii) an unprecedented extensive expansion for C13 legumain-like peptidases is found in T. urticae; iii) a sequence-structure analysis of the spider mite cystatins suggests that diversification may be related to an expansion of their inhibitory range; and iv) an in silico transcriptomic analysis shows that most cathepsin B and L cysteine peptidases, legumains and several members of the cystatin family are expressed at a higher rate in T. urticae feeding stages than in embryos.

conclusionComparative genomics has provided valuable insights on the spider mite cysteine peptidases and their inhibitors. Mite-specific proliferations of C1A and C13 peptidase and I25 cystatin families and their over-expression in feeding stages of mites fit with a putative role in mite's feeding and could have a key role in its broad host feeding range.

Indexed as

GenomicsAnimalsArthropodsAsparaginyl EndopeptidaseCathepsin BCathepsin LCystatinsCysteine EndopeptidasesCysteine ProteasesCysteine Proteinase InhibitorsEmbryo, NonmammalianEvolution, MolecularPhylogenyTetranychidaeAsparaginyl EndopeptidaseCathepsin BCathepsin LCystatinsCysteine EndopeptidasesCysteine ProteasesCysteine Proteinase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID22784002
PMCPMC3407033
OpenAlexW2140801703

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.