Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25775536›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2015

Production and packaging of a biological arsenal: evolution of centipede venoms under morphological constraint.

Eivind A B Undheim, Brett R Hamilton, Nyoman D Kurniawan, Greg Bowlay, Bronwen W Cribb, David J Merritt, Bryan G Fry, Glenn F King, Deon J Venter

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015. 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
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Mapping Enzyme Activity on Tissue by Functional Mass Spectrometry Imaging.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Eivind A B UndheimInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, Centre for Advanced Imaging.
Brett R HamiltonPathology Department, Mater Health Services, South Brisbane, QLD 4101, Australia Mater Research Institute, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia; and.
Nyoman D KurniawanCentre for Advanced Imaging.
Greg BowlayPathology Department, Mater Health Services, South Brisbane, QLD 4101, Australia.
Bronwen W CribbSchool of Biological Sciences.
David J MerrittSchool of Biological Sciences.
Bryan G FrySchool of Biological Sciences.
Glenn F KingInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, glenn.king@imb.uq.edu.au deon.venter@mater.org.au.
Deon J VenterPathology Department, Mater Health Services, South Brisbane, QLD 4101, Australia Mater Research Institute, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia; and School of Medicine, and glenn.king@imb.uq.edu.au deon.venter@mater.org.au.
Mater Health Services · AUResearch Institute for Bioscience and Biotechnology · NPUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Venom represents one of the most extreme manifestations of a chemical arms race. Venoms are complex biochemical arsenals, often containing hundreds to thousands of unique protein toxins. Despite their utility for prey capture, venoms are energetically expensive commodities, and consequently it is hypothesized that venom complexity is inversely related to the capacity of a venomous animal to physically subdue prey. Centipedes, one of the oldest yet least-studied venomous lineages, appear to defy this rule. Although scutigeromorph centipedes produce less complex venom than those secreted by scolopendrid centipedes, they appear to rely heavily on venom for prey capture. We show that the venom glands are large and well developed in both scutigerid and scolopendrid species, but that scutigerid forcipules lack the adaptations that allow scolopendrids to inflict physical damage on prey and predators. Moreover, we reveal that scolopendrid venom glands have evolved to accommodate a much larger number of secretory cells and, by using imaging mass spectrometry, we demonstrate that toxin production is heterogeneous across these secretory units. We propose that the differences in venom complexity between centipede orders are largely a result of morphological restrictions of the venom gland, and consequently there is a strong correlation between the morphological and biochemical complexity of this unique venom system. The current data add to the growing body of evidence that toxins are not expressed in a spatially homogenous manner within venom glands, and they suggest that the link between ecology and toxin evolution is more complex than previously thought.

Indexed as

AnimalsArthropodsArthropod VenomsBiological EvolutionExocrine GlandsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMass SpectrometryMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningPeptidesProteinsSpectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-IonizationStress, MechanicalArthropod VenomsPeptidesProteinscentipedemass spectrometry imagingvenom evolutionvenom-gland morphologyvenom optimization hypothesis

Identifiers

PMID25775536
PMCPMC4386323
OpenAlexW2048064132

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.