Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31298692›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2019

Evolution of Phototransduction Genes in Lepidoptera.

Aide Macias-Muñoz, Aline G Rangel Olguin, Adriana D Briscoe

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Day-night gene expression reveals circadian geneProceedings. Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. AnInsects · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Insect opsins and evo-devo: what have we learned in 25 years?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Aide Macias-MuñozDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Irvine.
Aline G Rangel OlguinDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Irvine.
Adriana D BriscoeDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Irvine.
University of California, Irvine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vision is underpinned by phototransduction, a signaling cascade that converts light energy into an electrical signal. Among insects, phototransduction is best understood in Drosophila melanogaster. Comparison of D. melanogaster against three insect species found several phototransduction gene gains and losses, however, lepidopterans were not examined. Diurnal butterflies and nocturnal moths occupy different light environments and have distinct eye morphologies, which might impact the expression of their phototransduction genes. Here we investigated: 1) how phototransduction genes vary in gene gain or loss between D. melanogaster and Lepidoptera, and 2) variations in phototransduction genes between moths and butterflies. To test our prediction of phototransduction differences due to distinct visual ecologies, we used insect reference genomes, phylogenetics, and moth and butterfly head RNA-Seq and transcriptome data. As expected, most phototransduction genes were conserved between D. melanogaster and Lepidoptera, with some exceptions. Notably, we found two lepidopteran opsins lacking a D. melanogaster ortholog. Using antibodies we found that one of these opsins, a candidate retinochrome, which we refer to as unclassified opsin (UnRh), is expressed in the crystalline cone cells and the pigment cells of the butterfly, Heliconius melpomene. Our results also show that butterflies express similar amounts of trp and trpl channel mRNAs, whereas moths express ∼50× less trp, a potential adaptation to darkness. Our findings suggest that while many single-copy D. melanogaster phototransduction genes are conserved in lepidopterans, phototransduction gene expression differences exist between moths and butterflies that may be linked to their visual light environment.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene Expression RegulationGenome, InsectAnimalsButterfliesDrosophila melanogasterInsect ProteinsLight Signal TransductionPhylogenyTranscriptomeInsect ProteinsCalxDAGLNckx30Copsintrpwunen

Identifiers

PMID31298692
PMCPMC6698658
OpenAlexW2960709321

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.