Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25674592›Full record

ReviewVirusdisease2014

Antiviral responses of arthropod vectors: an update on recent advances.

Claudia Rückert, Lesley Bell-Sakyi, John K Fazakerley, Rennos Fragkoudis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Virusdisease, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Ticks: More Than Just a Pathogen Delivery Service.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Stimulation ofFrontiers in immunology · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Tick-Virus Interactions: Toll Sensing.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2017
    Article
  18. Review
  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

4 authors.

Claudia RückertThe Pirbright Institute, Ash Road, Pirbright, Surrey, GU24 0NF UK ; The Roslin Institute & Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, Midlothian, EH25 9RG UK.
Lesley Bell-SakyiThe Pirbright Institute, Ash Road, Pirbright, Surrey, GU24 0NF UK.
John K FazakerleyThe Pirbright Institute, Ash Road, Pirbright, Surrey, GU24 0NF UK.
Rennos FragkoudisThe Pirbright Institute, Ash Road, Pirbright, Surrey, GU24 0NF UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Arthropod vectors, such as mosquitoes, ticks, biting midges and sand flies, transmit many viruses that can cause outbreaks of disease in humans and animals around the world. Arthropod vector species are invading new areas due to globalisation and environmental changes, and contact between exotic animal species, humans and arthropod vectors is increasing, bringing with it the regular emergence of new arboviruses. For future strategies to control arbovirus transmission, it is important to improve our understanding of virus-vector interactions. In the last decade knowledge of arthropod antiviral immunity has increased rapidly. RNAi has been proposed as the most important antiviral response in mosquitoes and it is likely to be the most important antiviral response in all arthropods. However, other newly-discovered antiviral strategies such as melanisation and the link between RNAi and the JAK/STAT pathway via the cytokine Vago have been characterised in the last few years. This review aims to summarise the most important and most recent advances made in arthropod antiviral immunity.

Indexed as

ArbovirusInnate immunityMidgeMosquitoRNAiTick

Identifiers

PMID25674592
PMCPMC4188209

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.