Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30486779›Full record

ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2018

Growth zone segmentation in the milkweed bug Oncopeltus fasciatus sheds light on the evolution of insect segmentation.

Tzach Auman, Ariel D Chipman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The development and evolution of arthropod tagmata.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  4. Same rule, different genes:Science advances · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. EvoDevo · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Shifting roles ofDevelopment (Cambridge, England) · 2019
    Article
  19. 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

2 authors.

Tzach AumanThe Department of Ecology, Evolution & Behavior, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Edmond J. Safra Campus, Givat Ram, 91904, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-2233-4234
Ariel D ChipmanThe Department of Ecology, Evolution & Behavior, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Edmond J. Safra Campus, Givat Ram, 91904, Jerusalem, Israel. ariel.chipman@huji.ac.il.ORCID 0000-0001-6696-840X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne of the best studied developmental processes is the Drosophila segmentation cascade. However, this cascade is generally considered to be highly derived and unusual, with segments being patterned simultaneously, rather than the ancestral sequential segmentation mode. We present a detailed analysis of the segmentation cascade of the milkweed bug Oncopletus fasciatus, an insect with a more primitive segmentation mode, as a comparison to Drosophila, with the aim of reconstructing the evolution of insect segmentation modes.

resultsWe document the expression of 12 genes, representing different phases in the segmentation process. Using double staining we reconstruct the spatio-temporal relationships among these genes. We then show knock-down phenotypes of representative genes in order to uncover their roles and position in the cascade.

conclusionsWe conclude that sequential segmentation in the Oncopeltus germband includes three slightly overlapping phases: Primary pair-rule genes generate the first segmental gene expression in the anterior growth zone. This pattern is carried anteriorly by a series of secondary pair-rule genes, expressed in the transition between the growth zone and the segmented germband. Segment polarity genes are expressed in the segmented germband with conserved relationships. Unlike most holometabolous insects, this process generates a single-segment periodicity, and does not have a double-segment pattern at any stage. We suggest that the evolutionary transition to double-segment patterning lies in mutually exclusive expression patterns of secondary pair-rule genes. The fact that many aspects of the putative Oncopeltus segmentation network are similar to those of Drosophila, is consistent with a simple transition between sequential and simultaneous segmentation.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionBody PatterningAnimalsAsclepiasDrosophilaGene Expression Regulation, DevelopmentalGenes, InsectHeteropteraInsect ProteinsPhenotypeRNA InterferenceRNA, MessengerInsect ProteinsRNA, MessengerArthropodBody planEvo-devoSegment

Identifiers

PMID30486779
PMCPMC6262967

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.