Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33465061›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2021

A novel terpene synthase controls differences in anti-aphrodisiac pheromone production between closely related Heliconius butterflies.

Kathy Darragh, Anna Orteu, Daniella Black, Kelsey J R P Byers, Daiane Szczerbowski, Ian A Warren, Pasi Rastas, Ana Pinharanda, John W Davey, Sylvia Fernanda Garza and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Canonical terpene synthases in arthropods: Intraphylum gene transfer.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

15 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Kathy DarraghDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9215-014X
Anna OrteuDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3911-0747
Daniella BlackDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Kelsey J R P ByersDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0923-8264
Daiane SzczerbowskiInstitute of Organic Chemistry, Department of Life Sciences, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3733-2960
Ian A WarrenDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Pasi RastasInstitute of Biotechnology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Ana PinharandaDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4696-9218
John W DaveyDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1017-9775
Sylvia Fernanda GarzaSmithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panamá, Panamá.
Diana Abondano AlmeidaSmithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panamá, Panamá.
Richard M MerrillSmithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panamá, Panamá.ORCID 0000-0003-4527-9298
W Owen McMillanSmithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panamá, Panamá.
Stefan SchulzInstitute of Organic Chemistry, Department of Life Sciences, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4810-324X
Chris D JigginsDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7809-062X
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute · PAUniversity of Cambridge · GBTechnische Universität Braunschweig · DEUniversity of Helsinki · FIUniversity of St Andrews · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plants and insects often use the same compounds for chemical communication, but not much is known about the genetics of convergent evolution of chemical signals. The terpene (E)-β-ocimene is a common component of floral scent and is also used by the butterfly Heliconius melpomene as an anti-aphrodisiac pheromone. While the biosynthesis of terpenes has been described in plants and microorganisms, few terpene synthases (TPSs) have been identified in insects. Here, we study the recent divergence of 2 species, H. melpomene and Heliconius cydno, which differ in the presence of (E)-β-ocimene; combining linkage mapping, gene expression, and functional analyses, we identify 2 novel TPSs. Furthermore, we demonstrate that one, HmelOS, is able to synthesise (E)-β-ocimene in vitro. We find no evidence for TPS activity in HcydOS (HmelOS ortholog of H. cydno), suggesting that the loss of (E)-β-ocimene in this species is the result of coding, not regulatory, differences. The TPS enzymes we discovered are unrelated to previously described plant and insect TPSs, demonstrating that chemical convergence has independent evolutionary origins.

Indexed as

ButterfliesAlkyl and Aryl TransferasesAnimalsAphrodisiacsAvoidance LearningEvolution, MolecularFemaleGenes, InsectMalePheromonesPhylogenySexual Behavior, AnimalSpecies SpecificityAlkyl and Aryl TransferasesAphrodisiacsPheromonesterpene synthase

Identifiers

PMID33465061
PMCPMC7815096
OpenAlexW3124277130

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.