ArticleBMC genomics2024
Genetics of flight in spongy moths (Lymantria dispar ssp.): functionally integrated profiling of a complex invasive trait.
Article in BMC genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Genomic investigations of successful invasions: the picture emerging from recent studies.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025Pooled it
- Chromosome-level genome assembly of the casuarina moth, Lymantria xylina Swinhoe (1903).Scientific data · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFlight can drastically enhance dispersal capacity and is a key trait defining the potential of exotic insect species to spread and invade new habitats. The phytophagous European spongy moths (ESM, Lymantria dispar dispar) and Asian spongy moths (ASM; a multi-species group represented here by L. d. asiatica and L. d. japonica), are globally invasive species that vary in adult female flight capability-female ASM are typically flight capable, whereas female ESM are typically flightless. Genetic markers of flight capability would supply a powerful tool for flight profiling of these species at any intercepted life stage. To assess the functional complexity of spongy moth flight and to identify potential markers of flight capability, we used multiple genetic approaches aimed at capturing complementary signals of putative flight-relevant genetic divergence between ESM and ASM: reduced representation genome-wide association studies, whole genome sequence comparisons, and developmental transcriptomics. We then judged the candidacy of flight-associated genes through functional analyses aimed at addressing the proximate demands of flight and salient features of the ecological context of spongy moth flight evolution.
resultsCandidate gene sets were typically non-overlapping across different genetic approaches, with only nine gene annotations shared between any pair of approaches. We detected an array of flight-relevant functional themes across gene sets that collectively suggest divergence in flight capability between European and Asian spongy moth lineages has coincided with evolutionary differentiation in multiple aspects of flight development, execution, and surrounding life history. Overall, our results indicate that spongy moth flight evolution has shaped or been influenced by a large and functionally broad network of traits.
conclusionsOur study identified a suite of flight-associated genes in spongy moths suited to exploration of the genetic architecture and evolution of flight, or validation for flight profiling purposes. This work illustrates how complementary genetic approaches combined with phenotypically targeted functional analyses can help to characterize genetically complex traits.
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.