Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24409296›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

A staging scheme for the development of the moth midge Clogmia albipunctata.

Eva Jiménez-Guri, Karl R Wotton, Brenda Gavilán, Johannes Jaeger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Breaking anterior-posterior symmetry in the moth flybioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. How two extraembryonic epithelia became one: serosa and amnion features and functions ofPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  10. Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Royal Society open science · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Eva Jiménez-GuriEMBL/CRG Research Unit in Systems Biology, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.
Karl R WottonEMBL/CRG Research Unit in Systems Biology, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.
Brenda GavilánEMBL/CRG Research Unit in Systems Biology, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.
Johannes JaegerEMBL/CRG Research Unit in Systems Biology, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Model organisms, such as Drosophila melanogaster, allow us to address a wide range of biological questions with experimental rigour. However, studies in model species need to be complemented by comparative studies if we are to fully understand the functional properties and evolutionary history of developmental processes. The establishment of new model organisms is crucial for this purpose. One of the first essential steps to establish a species as an experimental model is to carefully describe its life cycle and development. The resulting staging scheme serves as a framework for molecular studies, and allows us to homologise developmental processes between species. In this paper, we have characterised the life cycle and development of an emerging non-drosophilid dipteran model system: the moth midge Clogmia albipunctata. In particular, we focus on early embryogenesis (cleavage and blastoderm cycles before gastrulation), on formation and retraction of extraembryonic tissues, and on formation of the germ line. Considering the large evolutionary distance between the two species (approximately 250 million years), we find that the development of C. albipunctata is remarkably conserved compared to D. melanogaster. On the other hand, we detect significant differences in morphology and timing affecting the development of extraembryonic tissues and the germ line. Moreover, C. albipunctata shows several heterochronic shifts, and lacks head involution and associated processes during late stages of development.

Indexed as

Life Cycle StagesAnimalsMoths

Identifiers

PMID24409296
PMCPMC3883683

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.