ArticleMolecular ecology2022
Captivity induces large and population-dependent brain transcriptomic changes in wild-caught cane toads (Rhinella marina).
Article in Molecular ecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Morphofunctional effects of captivity on the microanatomy of the talus bone in a wild ungulate (Sus scrofa).Journal of anatomy · 2026Article
- Gene expression comparisons between captive and wild shrew brains reveal captivity effects.Biology letters · 2025Article
- Is developmental plasticity triggered by DNA methylation changes in the invasive cane toad (Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Captivity induces large and population-dependent brain transcriptomic changes in wild-caught cane toads (Rhinella marina).Molecular ecology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gene expression levels are key molecular phenotypes at the interplay between genotype and environment. Mounting evidence suggests that short-term changes in environmental conditions, such as those encountered in captivity, can substantially affect gene expression levels. Yet, the exact magnitude of this effect, how general it is, and whether it results in parallel changes across populations are not well understood. Here, we take advantage of the well-studied cane toad, Rhinella marina, to examine the effect of short-term captivity on brain gene expression levels, and determine whether effects of captivity differ between long-colonized and vanguard populations of the cane toad's Australian invasion range. We compared the transcriptomes of wild-caught toads immediately assayed with those from toads captured from the same populations but maintained in captivity for seven months. We found large differences in gene expression levels between captive and wild-caught toads from the same population, with an over-representation of processes related to behaviour and the response to stress. Captivity had a much larger effect on both gene expression levels and gene expression variability in toads from vanguard populations compared to toads from long-colonized areas, potentially indicating an increased plasticity in toads at the leading edge of the invasion. Overall, our findings indicate that short-term captivity can induce large and population-specific transcriptomic changes, which has significant implications for studies comparing phenotypic traits of wild-caught organisms from different populations that have been held in captivity.
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.