Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34351494›Full record

ArticleParasitology research2022

Opinion: What do rescue experiments with heterologous proteins tell us and what not?

Adrian Streit

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasitology research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 51% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adrian StreitDepartment of Integrative Evolutionary Biology, Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology, Max-Planck-Ring 9, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. adrian.streit@tuebingen.mpg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7838-621X
Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recent progress in sequencing technology allowed the compilation of gene lists for a large number of organisms, though many of these organisms are hardly experimentally tractable when compared with well-established model organisms. One popular approach to further characterize genes identified in a poorly tractable organism is to express these genes in a model organism, and then ask what the protein does in this system or if the gene is capable of replacing the homologous endogenous one when the latter is mutated. While this is a valid approach for certain questions, I argue that the results of such experiments are frequently wrongly interpreted. If, for example, a gene from a parasitic nematode is capable of replacing its homologous gene in the model nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, it is often concluded that the gene is most likely involved in the same biological process in its own organism as the C. elegans gene is in C. elegans. This conclusion is not valid. All this experiment tells us is that the chemical properties of the parasite protein are similar enough to the ones of the C. elegans protein that it can perform the function of the C. elegans protein in C. elegans. Here I discuss this misconception and illustrate it using the analog of similar electric switches (components) controlling various devices (processes).

Indexed as

Caenorhabditis elegansCaenorhabditis elegans ProteinsAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegans ProteinsBiochemical propertyGene functionNon-model organismRescue experiment

Identifiers

PMID34351494
PMCPMC8986660
OpenAlexW3188905859

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.