Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40610591›Full record

ArticleHeredity2025

Differences in gene expression and genetic variation underlying preference-performance mismatches: insights from a specialized native herbivore on an invasive toxic plant.

Nitin Ravikanthachari, Carol L Boggs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heredity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Nitin RavikanthachariDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA. ravikanth.nitin@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9474-7951
Carol L BoggsDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Specialist phytophagous insects have a narrow hostplant range for optimal development and survival. Mismatches between female oviposition preference and larval performance can lead to high fitness costs. Understanding the mechanistic basis of this decoupling can help us understand evolutionary constraints and aid in predicting outcomes of error-prone oviposition. We investigated the causes for preference-performance mismatches in a specialist native herbivore laying eggs on an invasive toxic plant. Transcriptomic analyses revealed host-plant-specific gene expression signatures in larvae feeding on different plants, while there was no differential gene expression in gustatory/olfactory organs of adult females with different oviposition preferences. However, genomic analysis revealed significant genetic differentiation in several genes underlying signal transduction in adult females with different oviposition preferences. The larvae feeding on toxic plants showed lower expression of specialized detoxification enzymes and higher expression of general digestive enzymes, indicating the inability of larvae to detoxify toxic compounds present in the toxic plants. We additionally found that genes related to successful detoxification and adaptive feeding were enriched in larvae feeding on native plants, while genes related to toxic responses, apoptosis, and accelerated development were enriched in larvae feeding on toxic plants. Our findings dissect the underlying mechanisms behind a preference-performance mismatch, quantifying the impact of error-prone oviposition on larval performance in a specialized species interaction.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationHerbivoryAnimalsFemaleGene Expression ProfilingIntroduced SpeciesLarvaOvipositionTranscriptome

Identifiers

PMID40610591
PMCPMC12316934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.