Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27160597›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2016

Friend, foe or food? Recognition and the role of antimicrobial peptides in gut immunity and Drosophila-microbe interactions.

Nichole A Broderick

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Meta-analysis of Diets Used inG3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Microbiome contribution tobioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Identification of anFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Article
  7. International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Cellular and molecular organization of the Drosophila foregut.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Heliyon · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Aspirin Positively Contributes toAging and disease · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Evolution of animal immunity in the light of beneficial symbioses.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Review
  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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nichole A BroderickDepartment of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA nichole.broderick@uconn.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6830-9456
Google (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drosophila melanogaster lives, breeds and feeds on fermenting fruit, an environment that supports a high density, and often a diversity, of microorganisms. This association with such dense microbe-rich environments has been proposed as a reason that D. melanogaster evolved a diverse and potent antimicrobial peptide (AMP) response to microorganisms, especially to combat potential pathogens that might occupy this niche. Yet, like most animals, D. melanogaster also lives in close association with the beneficial microbes that comprise its microbiota, or microbiome, and recent studies have shown that antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) of the epithelial immune response play an important role in dictating these interactions and controlling the host response to gut microbiota. Moreover, D. melanogaster also eats microbes for food, consuming fermentative microbes of decaying plant material and their by-products as both larvae and adults. The processes of nutrient acquisition and host defence are remarkably similar and use shared functions for microbe detection and response, an observation that has led to the proposal that the digestive and immune systems have a common evolutionary origin. In this manner, D. melanogaster provides a powerful model to understand how, and whether, hosts differentiate between the microbes they encounter across this spectrum of associations.This article is part of the themed issue 'Evolutionary ecology of arthropod antimicrobial peptides'.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesBacteriaDrosophila melanogasterGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHost-Pathogen InteractionsInsect ProteinsAnti-Infective AgentsAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesInsect Proteinsgut epitheliuminnate immunitymicrobiomesymbiosis

Identifiers

PMID27160597
PMCPMC4874392
OpenAlexW2345913257

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.