ArticleScientific reports2021
Exploring bycatch diversity of organisms in whole genome sequencing of Erebidae moths (Lepidoptera).
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbial Symbiosis in Lepidoptera: Analyzing the Gut Microbiota for Sustainable Pest Management.Biology · 2025Review
- Teknonaturalist: A Snakemake Pipeline for Assessing Fungal Diversity From Plant Genome Bycatch.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Screening Host Genomic Data for Wolbachia Infections.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Validating a Mitochondrial Sweep Accompanying the Rapid Spread of a Maternally Inherited Symbiont.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Recovery of metagenomic data from theWellcome open research · 2023Article
- Article
- One's trash is someone else's treasure: sequence read archives from Lepidoptera genomes provide material for genome reconstruction of their endosymbionts.BMC microbiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Models estimate that up to 80% of all butterfly and moth species host vertically transmitted endosymbiotic microorganisms, which can affect the host fitness, metabolism, reproduction, population dynamics, and genetic diversity, among others. The supporting empirical data are however currently highly biased towards the generally more colourful butterflies, and include less information about moths. Additionally, studies of symbiotic partners of Lepidoptera predominantly focus on the common bacterium Wolbachia pipientis, while infections by other inherited microbial partners have more rarely been investigated. Here, we mine the whole genome sequence data of 47 species of Erebidae moths, with the aims to both inform on the diversity of symbionts potentially associated with this Lepidoptera group, and discuss the potential of metagenomic approaches to inform on host associated microbiome diversity. Based on the result of Kraken2 and MetaPhlAn2 analyses, we found clear evidence of the presence of Wolbachia in four species. Our result also suggests the presence of three other bacterial symbionts (Burkholderia spp., Sodalis spp. and Arsenophonus spp.) in three other moth species. Additionally, we recovered genomic material from bracovirus in about half of our samples. The detection of the latter, usually found in mutualistic association to braconid parasitoid wasps, may inform on host-parasite interactions that take place in the natural habitat of the Erebidae moths, suggesting either contamination with material from species of the host community network, or horizontal transfer of members of the microbiome between interacting species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.