Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41237812›Full record

ReviewJournal of radiation research2025

Drosophila melanogaster: an old and future ally to radiobiology.

Terrence M Trinca, Joaquín de Navascués

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of radiation research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. 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

2 authors.

Terrence M TrincaSchool of Biochemistry, Biomedical Science Building, University Walk, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TD, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0002-0333-683X
Joaquín de NavascuésSchool of Life Sciences, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5414-4056

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From simple viruses to complex multicellular animals, ionizing radiation can have deleterious effects on all organisms. For humans, exposure to radiation can come from a wide range of sources such as environmental contamination, occupational hazards, radiotherapy and space flight. In the next few decades, radiation toxicity will become an increasing healthcare concern as nuclear power usage, risk of nuclear war, space-based industry and cancer incidence are all projected to increase. While the biology of acute radiation sickness is relatively well understood, ionizing radiation can also cause severe chronic effects whose molecular and cellular basis remain largely a mystery. This is partly because complications that arise months or even years after exposure depend on tissue-level responses, and so there are aspects of late radiation toxicity that can only be investigated in vivo. We suggest that Drosophila melanogaster can contribute to understanding this phenomenon. To this date, Drosophila radiation research has been heterogenous in terms of dose, radiation type and developmental stage of exposure, but despite this a pattern of observations suggest that fruit flies experience both short- and long-term radiation injury. Moreover, the genetic underpinning of the Drosophila radiation response seems conserved with that of humans. We propose that Drosophila is well-suited to model radiation damage to tissues, highlighting the potential of the fly to inform clinical radiobiology research.

Indexed as

Drosophila melanogasterRadiobiologyAnimalsDose-Response Relationship, RadiationHumanschronic radiation toxicityDrosophila melanogasterradiation responseradiobiologyradiogenomics

Identifiers

PMID41237812
PMCPMC12648074

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.