Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24323176›Full record

ArticleDie Naturwissenschaften2014

How flies respond to honey bee pheromone: the role of the foraging gene on reproductive response to queen mandibular pheromone.

Alison L Camiletti, David N Awde, Graham J Thompson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Die Naturwissenschaften, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. TheJournal of neurogenetics · 2021
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Sexual response of male Drosophila to honey bee queen mandibular pheromone: implications for genetic studies of social insects.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2017
    Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Alison L CamilettiBiology Department, Western University, 1151 Richmond Street, London, ON, N6A 5B7, Canada, acamilet@uwo.ca.
David N Awde
Graham J Thompson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study we test one central prediction from sociogenomic theory--that social and non-social taxa share common genetic toolkits that regulate reproduction in response to environmental cues. We exposed Drosophila females of rover (for(R)) and sitter (for(s)) genotypes to an ovary-suppressing pheromone derived from the honeybee Apis mellifera. Surprisingly, queen mandibular pheromone (QMP) affected several measures of fitness in flies, and in a manner comparable to the pheromone's normal effect on bee workers. QMP-treated sitter flies had smaller ovaries that contained fewer eggs than did untreated controls. QMP-treated rover flies, by contrast, showed a more variable pattern that only sometimes resulted in ovary inhibition, while a third strain of fly that contains a sitter mutant allele in a rover background (for(s2)) showed no ovarian response to QMP. Taken together, our results suggest that distinctly non-social insects have some capacity to respond to social cues, but that this response varies with fly genotype. In general, the interspecific response is consistent with a conserved gene set affecting reproductive physiology. The differential response among strains in particular suggests that for is itself important for modulating the fly's pheromonal response.

Indexed as

AnimalsBeesDrosophilaFemaleGenotypeMutationOvaryPheromonesReproductionPheromones

Identifiers

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.