ReviewF1000Research2017
What serial homologs can tell us about the origin of insect wings.
Review in F1000Research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Insect Flight and Lipid Metabolism: Beyond the Classic Knowledge.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Gill regeneration in the mayflyOpen biology · 2024Article
- Does integument ariseFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Serial Homology and Segment Identity in the Arthropod Head.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Out from under the wing: reconceptualizing the insect wing gene regulatory network as a versatile, general module for body-wall lobes in arthropods.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Development of the Pre-gnathal Segments in the Milkweed BugFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- Two sets of candidate crustacean wing homologues and their implication for the origin of insect wings.Nature ecology & evolution · 2020Article
- Co-option of wing-patterning genes underlies the evolution of the treehopper helmet.Nature ecology & evolution · 2020Article
- Integrating morphology and phylogenomics supports a terrestrial origin of insect flight.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Dual evolutionary origin of insect wings supported by an investigation of the abdominal wing serial homologs inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018Article
- Research on Biomimetic Models and Nanomechanical Behaviour of Membranous Wings of Chinese BeeApplied bionics and biomechanics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the insect wing is a textbook example of morphological novelty, the origin of insect wings remains a mystery and is regarded as a chief conundrum in biology. Centuries of debates have culminated into two prominent hypotheses: the tergal origin hypothesis and the pleural origin hypothesis. However, between these two hypotheses, there is little consensus in regard to the origin tissue of the wing as well as the evolutionary route from the origin tissue to the functional flight device. Recent evolutionary developmental (evo-devo) studies have shed new light on the origin of insect wings. A key concept in these studies is "serial homology". In this review, we discuss how the wing serial homologs identified in recent evo-devo studies have provided a new angle through which this century-old conundrum can be explored. We also review what we have learned so far from wing serial homologs and discuss what we can do to go beyond simply identifying wing serial homologs and delve further into the developmental and genetic mechanisms that have facilitated the evolution of insect wings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.