ArticleInternational journal of medical microbiology : IJMM2013
Ehrlichia chaffeensis replication sites in adult Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in International journal of medical microbiology : IJMM, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of RNA Interference in Tick Research.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Ehrlichia chaffeensis is a Gram-negative, obligate intracellular bacterium which causes the tick-borne disease human monocytic ehrlichiosis. In vertebrates, E. chaffeensis replicates in monocytes and macrophages. However, no clear cell or tissue tropism has been defined in arthropods. Our group identified two host genes that control E. chaffeensis replication and infection in vivo in Drosophila, Uridine cytidine kinase and separation anxiety. Using the UAS-GAL4 RNAi system, we generated F1 flies (UAS-gene of interestRNAi x tissue-GAL4 flies) that have Uck2 or san silenced in ubiquitous or tissue-specific fashion. When Uck2 or san were suppressed in the hemocytes or in the fat body, E. chaffeensis replicated poorly and caused significantly less severe infections. Silencing of these genes in the eyes, wings, or the salivary glands did not impact fly susceptibility or bacterial replication. Our data suggest that in Drosophila, E. chaffeensis replicates within the hemocytes, the insect homolog of mammalian macrophages, and in the fat body, the liver homolog of mammals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.