Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27324919›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2016

Pervasive microRNA Duplication in Chelicerates: Insights from the Embryonic microRNA Repertoire of the Spider Parasteatoda tepidariorum.

Daniel J Leite, Maria Ninova, Maarten Hilbrant, Saad Arif, Sam Griffiths-Jones, Matthew Ronshaugen, Alistair P McGregor

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Gene and Genome Duplication in Spiders.Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Crucial Roles of miR-625 in Human Cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel J LeiteDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Gipsy Lane, Oxford, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom.
Maria NinovaFaculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
Maarten HilbrantDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Gipsy Lane, Oxford, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom.
Saad ArifDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Gipsy Lane, Oxford, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom.
Sam Griffiths-JonesFaculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, United Kingdom amcgregor@brookes.ac.uk sam.griffiths-jones@manchester.ac.uk matthew.ronshaugen@manchester.ac.uk.
Matthew RonshaugenFaculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, United Kingdom amcgregor@brookes.ac.uk sam.griffiths-jones@manchester.ac.uk matthew.ronshaugen@manchester.ac.uk.
Alistair P McGregorDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Gipsy Lane, Oxford, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom amcgregor@brookes.ac.uk sam.griffiths-jones@manchester.ac.uk matthew.ronshaugen@manchester.ac.uk.
Oxford Brookes University · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

MicroRNAs are small (∼22 nt) noncoding RNAs that repress translation and therefore regulate the production of proteins from specific target mRNAs. microRNAs have been found to function in diverse aspects of gene regulation within animal development and many other processes. Among invertebrates, both conserved and novel, lineage specific, microRNAs have been extensively studied predominantly in holometabolous insects such as Drosophila melanogaster However little is known about microRNA repertoires in other arthropod lineages such as the chelicerates. To understand the evolution of microRNAs in this poorly sampled subphylum, we characterized the microRNA repertoire expressed during embryogenesis of the common house spider Parasteatoda tepidariorum We identified a total of 148 microRNAs in P. tepidariorum representing 66 families. Approximately half of these microRNA families are conserved in other metazoans, while the remainder are specific to this spider. Of the 35 conserved microRNAs families 15 had at least two copies in the P. tepidariorum genome. A BLAST-based approach revealed a similar pattern of duplication in other spiders and a scorpion, but not among other chelicerates and arthropods, with the exception of a horseshoe crab. Among the duplicated microRNAs we found examples of lineage-specific tandem duplications, and the duplication of entire microRNA clusters in three spiders, a scorpion, and in a horseshoe crab. Furthermore, we found that paralogs of many P. tepidariorum microRNA families exhibit arm switching, which suggests that duplication was often followed by sub- or neofunctionalization. Our work shows that understanding the evolution of microRNAs in the chelicerates has great potential to provide insights into the process of microRNA duplication and divergence and the evolution of animal development.

Indexed as

Gene DuplicationAnimalsConserved SequenceDrosophila melanogasterEvolution, MolecularMicroRNAsSpidersMicroRNAsarm usageCheliceratalgene duplicationmicroRNAParasteatoda tepidariorumspiders

Identifiers

PMID27324919
PMCPMC4987109
OpenAlexW2464443045

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.