Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31289835›Full record

ArticleGigaScience2019

Toxins from scratch? Diverse, multimodal gene origins in the predatory robber fly Dasypogon diadema indicate a dynamic venom evolution in dipteran insects.

Stephan Holger Drukewitz, Lukas Bokelmann, Eivind A B Undheim, Björn M von Reumont

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GigaScience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Genome of venomous caterpillarProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Horizontal gene transfer underlies the painful stings of asp caterpillars (Lepidoptera: Megalopygidae).Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Production, composition, and mode of action of the painful defensive venom produced by a limacodid caterpillar,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Toxin-like neuropeptides in the sea anemoneProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Stephan Holger DrukewitzInstitute for Biology, University of Leipzig, Talstrasse 33, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Lukas BokelmannEvolutionary Genetics Department, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Eivind A B UndheimCentre for Advanced Imaging, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.
Björn M von ReumontProject group Bioresources, Animal Venomics, Fraunhofer Institute for Molecular Biology and Applied Ecology, Winchesterstrasse 2, 35392 Gießen, Germany.
Fraunhofer Institute for Molecular Biology and Applied Ecology · DEJustus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DEMax Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology · DEThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVenoms and the toxins they contain represent molecular adaptations that have evolved on numerous occasions throughout the animal kingdom. However, the processes that shape venom protein evolution are poorly understood because of the scarcity of whole-genome data available for comparative analyses of venomous species.

resultsWe performed a broad comparative toxicogenomic analysis to gain insight into the genomic mechanisms of venom evolution in robber flies (Asilidae). We first sequenced a high-quality draft genome of the hymenopteran hunting robber fly Dasypogon diadema, analysed its venom by a combined proteotranscriptomic approach, and compared our results with recently described robber fly venoms to assess the general composition and major components of asilid venom. We then applied a comparative genomics approach, based on 1 additional asilid genome, 10 high-quality dipteran genomes, and 2 lepidopteran outgroup genomes, to reveal the evolutionary mechanisms and origins of identified venom proteins in robber flies.

conclusionsWhile homologues were identified for 15 of 30 predominant venom protein in the non-asilid genomes, the remaining 15 highly expressed venom proteins appear to be unique to robber flies. Our results reveal that the venom of D. diadema likely evolves in a multimodal fashion comprising (i) neofunctionalization after gene duplication, (ii) expression-dependent co-option of proteins, and (iii) asilid lineage-specific orphan genes with enigmatic origin. The role of such orphan genes is currently being disputed in evolutionary genomics but has not been discussed in the context of toxin evolution. Our results display an unexpected dynamic venom evolution in asilid insects, which contrasts the findings of the only other insect toxicogenomic evolutionary analysis, in parasitoid wasps (Hymenoptera), where toxin evolution is dominated by single gene co-option. These findings underpin the significance of further genomic studies to cover more neglected lineages of venomous taxa and to understand the importance of orphan genes as possible drivers for venom evolution.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenes, InsectAnimalsArthropod VenomsDipteraGene DuplicationPhylogenyArthropod Venomscomparative venom-genomicsgene duplicationorphan genessingle gene co-optiontoxin gene evolutionvenom evolution

Identifiers

PMID31289835
PMCPMC6615979
OpenAlexW2958138233

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.