Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27160598›Full record

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

Antimicrobial defence and persistent infection in insects revisited.

Olga Makarova, Alexandro Rodríguez-Rojas, Murat Eravci, Chris Weise, Adam Dobson, Paul Johnston, Jens Rolff

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Pharmacokinetics determine persister formation inJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Impact ofInsects · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Evaluation of antibacterial activity induced bySaudi journal of biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Inoculum effect of antimicrobial peptides.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Olga MakarovaInstitut für Biologie, Evolutionary Biology, Freie Universität Berlin, Königin-Luise-Straße 1-3, Berlin 14195, Germany.
Alexandro Rodríguez-RojasInstitut für Biologie, Evolutionary Biology, Freie Universität Berlin, Königin-Luise-Straße 1-3, Berlin 14195, Germany.
Murat EravciInstitute of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Biochemistry, Freie Universität Berlin, Thielallee 63, Berlin 14195, Germany.
Chris WeiseInstitute of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Biochemistry, Freie Universität Berlin, Thielallee 63, Berlin 14195, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5507-4694
Adam DobsonGenetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, Darwin Building, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
Paul JohnstonInstitut für Biologie, Evolutionary Biology, Freie Universität Berlin, Königin-Luise-Straße 1-3, Berlin 14195, Germany Berlin Center for Genomics in Biodiversity Research, Königin-Luise-Straße 6-8, Berlin 14195, Germany.
Jens RolffInstitut für Biologie, Evolutionary Biology, Freie Universität Berlin, Königin-Luise-Straße 1-3, Berlin 14195, Germany Berlin-Brandenburg Institute of Advanced Biodiversity Research (BBIB), Altensteinstraße 6, Berlin 14195, Germany jens.rolff@fu-berlin.de.ORCID 0000-0002-1529-5409

Funding

European Research Council 260986
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insects show long-lasting antimicrobial immune responses that follow the initial fast-acting cellular processes. These immune responses are discussed to provide a form of phrophylaxis and/or to serve as a safety measure against persisting infections. The duration and components of such long-lasting responses have rarely been studied in detail, a necessary prerequisite to understand their adaptive value. Here, we present a 21 day proteomic time course of the mealworm beetle Tenebrio molitor immune-challenged with heat-killed Staphylococcus aureus The most upregulated peptides are antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), many of which are still highly abundant 21 days after infection. The identified AMPs included toll and imd-mediated AMPs, a significant number of which have no known function against S. aureus or other Gram-positive bacteria. The proteome reflects the selective arena for bacterial infections. The results also corroborate the notion of synergistic interactions in vivo that are difficult to model in vitroThis article is part of the themed issue 'Evolutionary ecology of arthropod antimicrobial peptides'.

Indexed as

Immunity, InnateAnimalsAnti-Infective AgentsAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesImmunoproteinsInsect ProteinsProteomicsStaphylococcus aureusTenebrioAnti-Infective AgentsAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesImmunoproteinsInsect Proteinsantimicrobial peptideslong-lasting immunityproteomicsTenebrio molitor

Identifiers

PMID27160598
PMCPMC4874393

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.