Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24391810›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

siRNA machinery in whitefly (Bemisia tabaci).

Santosh Kumar Upadhyay, Sameer Dixit, Shailesh Sharma, Harpal Singh, Jitesh Kumar, Praveen C Verma, K Chandrashekar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. 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
2.2field-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, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Insects · 2021
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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 5 institutions in 1 country.

Santosh Kumar UpadhyayNational Agri-Food Biotechnology Institute, (Department of Biotechnology, Government of India), Mohali, Punjab, India.
Sameer DixitCSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, RanaPratapMarg, Lucknow, India.
Shailesh SharmaNational Agri-Food Biotechnology Institute, (Department of Biotechnology, Government of India), Mohali, Punjab, India.
Harpal SinghCSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, RanaPratapMarg, Lucknow, India.
Jitesh KumarNational Agri-Food Biotechnology Institute, (Department of Biotechnology, Government of India), Mohali, Punjab, India.
Praveen C VermaCSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, RanaPratapMarg, Lucknow, India.
K ChandrashekarCSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, RanaPratapMarg, Lucknow, India ; Indian Agricultural Research Institute-Regional Station, Agricultural College Estate, Shivaji Nagar, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research · INGovernment of India · INIndian Agricultural Research Institute · INNational Agri-Food Biotechnology Institute · INNational Botanical Research Institute · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRNA interference has been emerged as an utmost tool for the control of sap sucking insect pests. Systemic response is necessary to control them in field condition. Whitefly is observed to be more prone to siRNA in recent studies, however the siRNA machinery and mechanism is not well established. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsTo identify the core siRNA machinery, we curated transcriptome data of whitefly from NCBI database. Partial mRNA sequences encoding Dicer2, R2D2, Argonaute2 and Sid1 were identified by tblastn search of homologous sequences from Aphis glycines and Tribolium castaneum. Complete encoding sequences were obtained by RACE, protein sequences derived by Expasy translate tool and confirmed by blastp analysis. Conserved domain search and Prosite-Scan showed similar domain architecture as reported in homologs from related insects. We found helicase, PAZ, RNaseIIIa, RNaseIIIb and double-stranded RNA-binding fold (DSRBF) in Dicer2; DsRBD in R2D2; and PAZ and PIWI domains in Argonaute2. Eleven transmembrane domains were detected in Sid1. Sequence homology and phylogenetic analysis revealed that RNAi machinery of whitefly is close to Aphids. Real-time PCR analysis showed similar expression of these genes in different developmental stages as reported in A. glycines and T. castaneum. Further, the expression level of above genes was quite similar to the housekeeping gene actin. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Availability of core siRNA machinery including the Sid1 and their universal expression in reasonable quantity indicated significant response of whitefly towards siRNA. Present report opens the way for controlling whitefly, one of the most destructive crop insect pest.

Indexed as

Gene Expression Regulation, DevelopmentalAmino Acid SequenceAnimalsArgonaute ProteinsBiomarkersGene Expression ProfilingHemipteraMolecular Sequence DataOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPhylogenyProtein KinasesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRibonuclease IIIRNA-Binding ProteinsRNA, MessengerArgonaute ProteinsBiomarkersProtein KinasesRibonuclease IIIRNA-Binding ProteinsRNA, MessengerRNA, Small InterferingSid1 kinase

Identifiers

PMID24391810
PMCPMC3877088
OpenAlexW1996181241

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.