Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27698145›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2016

Genetic mapping of male pheromone response in the European corn borer identifies candidate genes regulating neurogenesis.

Fotini A Koutroumpa, Astrid T Groot, Teun Dekker, David G Heckel

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. The evolution of species recognition labels in insects.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Fotini A KoutroumpaInstitute for Biodiversity and Ecosystems Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Entomology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, D-07745 Jena, Germany; fotini.koutroumpa@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-3238-1245
Astrid T GrootInstitute for Biodiversity and Ecosystems Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, 1098 XH Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Entomology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, D-07745 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9010-8872
Teun DekkerDivision of Chemical Ecology, Department of Plant Protection Biology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 23053 Alnarp, Sweden.
David G HeckelDepartment of Entomology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, D-07745 Jena, Germany.
Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology · DESwedish University of Agricultural Sciences · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sexual pheromone communication system of moths is a model system for studies of the evolution of reproductive isolation. Females emit a blend of volatile components that males detect at a distance. Species differences in female pheromone composition and male response directly reinforce reproductive isolation in nature, because even slight variations in the species-specific pheromone blend are usually rejected by the male. The mechanisms by which a new pheromone signal-response system could evolve are enigmatic, because any deviation from the optimally attractive blend should be selected against. Here we investigate the genetic mechanisms enabling a switch in male response. We used a quantitative trait locus-mapping approach to identify the genetic basis of male response in the two pheromone races of the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis Male response to a 99:1 vs. a 3:97 ratio of the E and Z isomers of the female pheromone is governed by a single, sex-linked locus. We found that the chromosomal region most tightly linked to this locus contains genes involved in neurogenesis but, in accordance with an earlier study, does not contain the odorant receptors expressed in the male antenna that detect the pheromone. This finding implies that differences in the development of neuronal pathways conveying information from the antenna, not differences in pheromone detection by the odorant receptors, are primarily responsible for the behavioral response differences among the males in this system. Comparison with other moth species reveals a previously unexplored mechanism by which male pheromone response can change in evolution.

Indexed as

Chromosome MappingGenes, InsectGenetic Association StudiesPheromonesAnalysis of VarianceAnimalsBehavior, AnimalCrosses, GeneticFemaleGenetic LinkageLod ScoreMaleMothsNeurogenesisQuantitative Trait LociSex AttractantsPheromonesSex AttractantsOstrinia nubilalispheromone responseQTL analysissexual communicationZ chromosome

Identifiers

PMID27698145
PMCPMC5081581
OpenAlexW2529037022

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.