Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24373391›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2013

The genome of Romanomermis culicivorax: revealing fundamental changes in the core developmental genetic toolkit in Nematoda.

Philipp H Schiffer, Michael Kroiher, Christopher Kraus, Georgios D Koutsovoulos, Sujai Kumar, Julia I R Camps, Ndifon A Nsah, Dominik Stappert, Krystalynne Morris, Peter Heger and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Evolution of sensory systems underlies the emergence of predatory feeding behaviors in nematodes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Nematode chromosomes.Genetics · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Adaptation of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

16 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Philipp H SchifferZoologisches Institut, Universität zu Köln, Cologne, NRW, Germany. philipp.schiffer@googlemail.com.
Michael Kroiher
Christopher Kraus
Georgios D Koutsovoulos
Sujai Kumar
Julia I R Camps
Ndifon A Nsah
Dominik Stappert
Krystalynne Morris
Peter Heger
Janine Altmüller
Peter Frommolt
Peter Nürnberg
W Kelley Thomas
Mark L Blaxter
Einhard Schierenberg
University of Cologne · DEUniversity of Edinburgh · GBUniversity of New Hampshire · US

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe genetics of development in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans has been described in exquisite detail. The phylum Nematoda has two classes: Chromadorea (which includes C. elegans) and the Enoplea. While the development of many chromadorean species resembles closely that of C. elegans, enoplean nematodes show markedly different patterns of early cell division and cell fate assignment. Embryogenesis of the enoplean Romanomermis culicivorax has been studied in detail, but the genetic circuitry underpinning development in this species has not been explored.

resultsWe generated a draft genome for R. culicivorax and compared its gene content with that of C. elegans, a second enoplean, the vertebrate parasite Trichinella spiralis, and a representative arthropod, Tribolium castaneum. This comparison revealed that R. culicivorax has retained components of the conserved ecdysozoan developmental gene toolkit lost in C. elegans. T. spiralis has independently lost even more of this toolkit than has C. elegans. However, the C. elegans toolkit is not simply depauperate, as many novel genes essential for embryogenesis in C. elegans are not found in, or have only extremely divergent homologues in R. culicivorax and T. spiralis. Our data imply fundamental differences in the genetic programmes not only for early cell specification but also others such as vulva formation and sex determination.

conclusionsDespite the apparent morphological conservatism, major differences in the molecular logic of development have evolved within the phylum Nematoda. R. culicivorax serves as a tractable system to contrast C. elegans and understand how divergent genomic and thus regulatory backgrounds nevertheless generate a conserved phenotype. The R. culicivorax draft genome will promote use of this species as a research model.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionGenome, HelminthAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansEnoplidaGene LibraryTranscriptomeTriboliumTrichinella spiralis

Identifiers

PMID24373391
PMCPMC3890508
OpenAlexW2141293587

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.