Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25924671›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2015

Novel insights into the insect trancriptome response to a natural DNA virus.

Seanna J McTaggart, Tidbury Hannah, Stephen Bridgett, Jennie S Garbutt, Gaganjot Kaur, Mike Boots

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Seanna J McTaggartInstitute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, Ashworth Laboratories University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3JT, UK. smctagga@staffmail.ed.ac.uk.
Tidbury HannahCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, The Nothe, Barrack Road, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8UB, UK. tidburyhannah@gmail.com.
Stephen BridgettEdinburgh Genomics, Institute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, Ashworth Laboratories University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3JT, UK. Stephen.Bridgett@ed.ac.uk.
Jennie S GarbuttInstitute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, Ashworth Laboratories University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3JT, UK. jennie.garbutt@gmail.com.
Gaganjot KaurThe Centre for Applied Genomics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, M5G 1X8, Canada. gaganjot.kaur@sickkids.ca.
Mike BootsDaphne du Maurier Centre for Ecology and Conservation, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Cornwall Campus, Cornwall, TR10 9EZ, UK. M.Boots@exeter.ac.uk.
University of Edinburgh · GBCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science · GBEdinburgh Genomics · GBHospital for Sick Children · CAUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0900740Medical Research Council MR/K001744/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known about invertebrate responses to DNA viruses. Here, we infect a commercially important pest moth species Plodia interpunctella with its naturally infecting DNA virus. We sequenced, assembled and annotated the complete transcriptome of the moth, and a partial transcriptome of the virus. We then tested for differential gene expression between moths that were exposed to the virus and controls.

resultsWe found 51 genes that were differentially expressed in moths exposed to a DNA baculovirus compared to controls. Gene set enrichment analysis revealed that cuticle proteins were significantly overrepresented in this group of genes. Interestingly, 6 of the 7 differentially expressed cuticle proteins were downregulated, suggesting that baculoviruses are able to manipulate its host's response. In fact, an additional 29 of the 51 genes were also downregulated in exposed compared with control animals, including a gram-negative binding protein. In contrast, genes involved in transposable element movement were upregulated after infection.

conclusionsWe present the first experiment to measure genome-wide gene expression in an insect after infection with a natural DNA virus. Our results indicate that cuticle proteins might be key genes underpinning the response to DNA viruses. Furthermore, the large proportion of genes that were downregulated after viral exposure suggests that this virus is actively manipulating the insect immune response. Finally, it appears that transposable element activity might increase during viral invasion. Combined, these results provide much needed host candidate genes that respond to DNA viral invaders.

Indexed as

Host-Pathogen InteractionsTranscriptomeAnimalsBaculoviridaeGenomeInsect ProteinsMothscuticle proteins, insectsInsect Proteins

Identifiers

PMID25924671
PMCPMC4415287
OpenAlexW2061121391

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.