Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34582710›Full record

ArticleOpen biology2021

Natural variation at the

Katherine H Shaw, Craig I Dent, Travis K Johnson, Alisha Anderson, Marien de Bruyne, Coral G Warr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Receptor sequence divergence, gain, loss, duplication, and neofunctionalization drive olfactory adaptation inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Genomic plasticity drives olfactory adaptation in a pest fly.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  5. Mechanisms of Variability Underlying Odor-Guided Locomotion.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022
    Review
  6. Natural variation at theOpen biology · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Katherine H ShawTasmanian School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart 7000, Tasmania, Australia.
Craig I DentSchool of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton 3800, Victoria, Australia.
Travis K JohnsonSchool of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton 3800, Victoria, Australia.
Alisha AndersonEcosystems Sciences, CSIRO, Black Mountain, Australian Capital Territory 2601, Australia.
Marien de BruyneSchool of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton 3800, Victoria, Australia.
Coral G WarrTasmanian School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart 7000, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5289-3950

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In insects, many critical olfactory behaviours are mediated by the large odorant receptor (

Indexed as

OvipositionAnimalsDrosophila melanogasterDrosophila ProteinsFemaleMaleOdorantsOlfactory Receptor NeuronsReceptors, OdorantDrosophila ProteinsReceptors, OdorantbehaviourDrosophila melanogasternatural selectionodorant receptorolfaction

Identifiers

PMID34582710
PMCPMC8478520

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.