Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36533297›Full record

ArticleMolecular ecology resources2023

First chromosome scale genomes of ithomiine butterflies (Nymphalidae: Ithomiini): Comparative models for mimicry genetic studies.

Jérémy Gauthier, Joana Meier, Fabrice Legeai, Melanie McClure, Annabel Whibley, Anthony Bretaudeau, Hélène Boulain, Hugues Parrinello, Sam T Mugford, Richard Durbin and 14 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular ecology resources, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

24 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Jérémy GauthierNatural History Museum of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6666-1002
Joana MeierDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7726-2875
Fabrice LegeaiBIPAA, IGEPP, INRAE, Institut Agro, Univ Rennes, Rennes, France.
Melanie McClureInstitut Systématique Évolution Biodiversité (ISYEB), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, MNHN, EPHE, Sorbonne Université, Université des Antilles, Paris, France.
Annabel WhibleySchool of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1878-7705
Anthony BretaudeauBIPAA, IGEPP, INRAE, Institut Agro, Univ Rennes, Rennes, France.
Hélène BoulainDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Hugues ParrinelloMGX-Montpellier GenomiX, Univ. Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1151-001X
Sam T MugfordDepartment of Crop Genetics, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, UK.
Richard DurbinDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Chenxi ZhouDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Shane McCarthyDepartment of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Christopher W WheatDepartment of Zoology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1863-2340
Florence Piron-PrunierInstitut Systématique Évolution Biodiversité (ISYEB), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, MNHN, EPHE, Sorbonne Université, Université des Antilles, Paris, France.
Christelle MonsempesInstitute of Ecology and Environmental Sciences of Paris, Sorbonne Université, INRAE, CNRS, IRD, UPEC, Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Marie-Christine FrançoisInstitute of Ecology and Environmental Sciences of Paris, Sorbonne Université, INRAE, CNRS, IRD, UPEC, Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Paul JayEcologie Systématique Evolution, Bâtiment 360, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France.
Camille NoûsLaboratoire Cogitamus, Paris, France.
Emma PersynInstitute of Ecology and Environmental Sciences of Paris, Sorbonne Université, INRAE, CNRS, IRD, UPEC, Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Emmanuelle Jacquin-JolyInstitute of Ecology and Environmental Sciences of Paris, Sorbonne Université, INRAE, CNRS, IRD, UPEC, Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Camille MeslinInstitute of Ecology and Environmental Sciences of Paris, Sorbonne Université, INRAE, CNRS, IRD, UPEC, Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Nicolas MontagnéInstitute of Ecology and Environmental Sciences of Paris, Sorbonne Université, INRAE, CNRS, IRD, UPEC, Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Claire LemaitreUniv Rennes, Inria, CNRS, IRISA, Rennes, France.
Marianne EliasInstitut Systématique Évolution Biodiversité (ISYEB), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, MNHN, EPHE, Sorbonne Université, Université des Antilles, Paris, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRUniversity of Cambridge · GBÉcole Pratique des Hautes Études · FRJohn Innes Centre · GBNatural History Museum of Geneva · CHStockholm University · SEUniversity of Auckland · NZUniversity of Lausanne · CH

Funding

Wellcome Trust 206194Wellcome Trust 207492Wellcome Trust 207492/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ithomiine butterflies (Nymphalidae: Danainae) represent the largest known radiation of Müllerian mimetic butterflies. They dominate by number the mimetic butterfly communities, which include species such as the iconic neotropical Heliconius genus. Recent studies on the ecology and genetics of speciation in Ithomiini have suggested that sexual pheromones, colour pattern and perhaps hostplant could drive reproductive isolation. However, no reference genome was available for Ithomiini, which has hindered further exploration on the genetic architecture of these candidate traits, and more generally on the genomic patterns of divergence. Here, we generated high-quality, chromosome-scale genome assemblies for two Melinaea species, M. marsaeus and M. menophilus, and a draft genome of the species Ithomia salapia. We obtained genomes with a size ranging from 396 to 503 Mb across the three species and scaffold N50 of 40.5 and 23.2 Mb for the two chromosome-scale assemblies. Using collinearity analyses we identified massive rearrangements between the two closely related Melinaea species. An annotation of transposable elements and gene content was performed, as well as a specialist annotation to target chemosensory genes, which is crucial for host plant detection and mate recognition in mimetic species. A comparative genomic approach revealed independent gene expansions in ithomiines and particularly in gustatory receptor genes. These first three genomes of ithomiine mimetic butterflies constitute a valuable addition and a welcome comparison to existing biological models such as Heliconius, and will enable further understanding of the mechanisms of adaptation in butterflies.

Indexed as

ButterfliesAdaptation, PhysiologicalAnimalsChromosomesGenomicsPhenotypechromosome-level genomeHi-Cithomiine butterfliesmimicryolfaction

Identifiers

PMID36533297
PMCPMC7617422
OpenAlexW4311932197

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.