Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36646703›Full record

ArticleNature communications2023

Micro and macroevolution of sea anemone venom phenotype.

Edward G Smith, Joachim M Surm, Jason Macrander, Adi Simhi, Guy Amir, Maria Y Sachkova, Magda Lewandowska, Adam M Reitzel, Yehu Moran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Duplication of a conserved mitochondrial enzyme gene arms parasitoid wasps with venom cytotoxicity and oogenesis regulation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Prey Shifts Drive Venom Evolution in Cone Snails.Molecular biology and evolution · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Coming of age in venom research.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Edward G Smith *University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Department of Biological Sciences, Charlotte, NC, USA. ed.g.smith@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0842-7757
Joachim M Surm *Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel. joachim.surm@mail.huji.ac.il.ORCID 0000-0001-6970-029X
Jason MacranderUniversity of North Carolina at Charlotte, Department of Biological Sciences, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Adi SimhiDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Guy AmirDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Maria Y SachkovaDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Magda LewandowskaDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Adam M ReitzelUniversity of North Carolina at Charlotte, Department of Biological Sciences, Charlotte, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5734-7118
Yehu MoranDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel. yehu.moran@mail.huji.ac.il.ORCID 0000-0001-9928-9294

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Venom is a complex trait with substantial inter- and intraspecific variability resulting from strong selective pressures acting on the expression of many toxic proteins. However, understanding the processes underlying toxin expression dynamics that determine the venom phenotype remains unresolved. By interspecific comparisons we reveal that toxin expression in sea anemones evolves rapidly and that in each species different toxin family dictates the venom phenotype by massive gene duplication events. In-depth analysis of the sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis, revealed striking variation of the dominant toxin (Nv1) diploid copy number across populations (1-24 copies) resulting from independent expansion/contraction events, which generate distinct haplotypes. Nv1 copy number correlates with expression at both the transcript and protein levels with one population having a near-complete loss of Nv1 production. Finally, we establish the dominant toxin hypothesis which incorporates observations in other venomous lineages that animals have convergently evolved a similar strategy in shaping their venom.

Indexed as

Cnidarian VenomsSea AnemonesAnimalsPhenotypeCnidarian Venoms

Identifiers

PMID36646703
PMCPMC9842752

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.