Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26744070›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

Sensillar expression and responses of olfactory receptors reveal different peripheral coding in two Helicoverpa species using the same pheromone components.

Hetan Chang, Mengbo Guo, Bing Wang, Yang Liu, Shuanglin Dong, Guirong Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Neuronal Compartmentalization: A Means to Integrate Sensory Input at the Earliest Stage of Information Processing?BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

6 authors.

Hetan ChangState Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Mengbo GuoState Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Bing WangState Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Yang LiuState Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.
Shuanglin DongCollege of Plant Protection, Nanjing Agricultural University/Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Crop Diseases and Pests (Nanjing Agricultural University), Ministry of Education, Nanjing, 210095, China.
Guirong WangState Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, 100193, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Male moths efficiently recognize conspecific sex pheromones thanks to their highly accurate and specific olfactory system. The Heliothis/Helicoverpa species are regarded as good models for studying the perception of sex pheromones. In this study, we performed a series of experiments to investigate the peripheral mechanisms of pheromone coding in two-closely related species, Helicoverpa armigera and H. assulta. The morphology and distribution patterns of sensilla trichoidea are similar between the two species when observed at the scanning electron microscope, but their performances are different. In H. armigera, three functional types of sensilla trichoidea (A, B and C) were found to respond to different pheromone components, while in H. assulta only two types of such sensilla (A and C) could be detected. The response profiles of all types of sensilla trichoidea in the two species well matched the specificities of the pheromone receptors (PRs) expressed in the same sensilla, as measured in voltage-clamp experiments. The expressions of PRs in neighboring olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs) within the same trichoid sensillum were further confirmed by in situ hybridization. Our results show how the same pheromone components can code for different messages at the periphery of two Helicoverpa species.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsAnimalsFemaleGene Expression RegulationIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMaleMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningMothsOlfactory PerceptionOlfactory Receptor NeuronsPatch-Clamp TechniquesReceptors, PheromoneSensillaSex AttractantsSignal TransductionSpecies SpecificityReceptors, PheromoneSex Attractants

Identifiers

PMID26744070
PMCPMC4705464

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.