Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31436529›Full record

ArticleeLife2019

Sex-specific transcriptomic responses to changes in the nutritional environment.

M Florencia Camus, Matthew Dw Piper, Max Reuter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The metabolic costs of meiotic drive.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

M Florencia CamusResearch Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0626-6865
Matthew Dw PiperSchool of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3245-7219
Max ReuterResearch Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9554-0795

Funding

European Commission #708362
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Males and females typically pursue divergent reproductive strategies and accordingly require different dietary compositions to maximise their fitness. Here we move from identifying sex-specific optimal diets to understanding the molecular mechanisms that underlie male and female responses to dietary variation in

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorGene Expression RegulationSexual Behavior, AnimalTranscription, GeneticAnimalsDietDrosophila melanogasterFemaleGene Expression ProfilingMaleSex FactorsD. melanogasterevolutionary biologygene expressiongeneticsgenomicsnutritionreproductionRNASeqsex differences

Identifiers

PMID31436529
PMCPMC6773443

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.