Article in PLoS genetics, 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.
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
14 authors.
Leonardo MurgianoDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3539-9344
Jessica K NiggelDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.
Kei TakahashiDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7455-0465
Valérie L DufourDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6465-1641
Raghavi SudharsanDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.
Jennifer C KwokDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1995-0095
Doreen BeckerDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0425-6284
Esha BanerjeeComparative Pathology Core (CPC), Department of Pathobiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7677-3702
Wen-Mei YuDepartment of Pediatrics, Aflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Winship Cancer Institute, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Cheng-Kui QuDepartment of Pediatrics, Aflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Winship Cancer Institute, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
William A BeltranDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1127-4774
Gustavo D AguirreDivision of Experimental Retinal Therapies, Department of Clinical Sciences & Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5228-256X
Funding
Phenotypic Diversity in COVID-19UL1TR001878 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI FITZGERALD, GARRET A · 2016 to 2025
$102.4M
MODELS OF HEREDITY RETINAL DEGENERATIONR01EY006855 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GUSTAVO David AGUIRRE, William A. Beltran · 1992 to 2026
$20.7M
Scientific TransparencyP30EY001583 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI CLAIRE H MITCHELL · 1985 to 2026
$19.5M
Translational Research for Retinal Degeneration TherapiesR01EY017549 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BELTRAN, WILLIAM A. · 2007 to 2024
$14.1M
PENN Vision Clinical Scientist ProgramK12EY015398 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI JOSHUA L DUNAIEF · 2004 to 2026
$11.7M
Leica Stellaris 8 Falcon/FLIM for the PennVet Imaging CoreS10OD032305 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI FREEDMAN, BRUCE D · 2023 to 2023
Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are a diverse group of disorders that share common vision deficits ranging from early onset blindness to severe and progressive later-onset disease. We report a form of early-onset day-vision loss, cone-rod dystrophy, in the Standard poodle. Through GWAS and homozygosity mapping, a large deletion on CFA8:NC_049229.1:g.60,022,583_60,040,453del was found which removes 3' portions of two different genes, PTPN21 and SPATA7, presenting a challenge for assessing the actual causative gene in a multi-gene large deletion. All affected dogs were homozygous for the mutant allele, which segregated perfectly with the phenotype within the breed. The variant was absent in 1879 dogs from the Dog10K database. While the role of SPATA7 for retinal disease has been established in human patients and genetically engineered mice, the role of PTPN21 in the retina is unclear even though it is expressed in rod and cone photoreceptors. Expression of whole and truncated transcripts for both genes was detected in skin fibroblasts from controls and cases. Retinal RNA analysis of PTPN21 splicing suggests that at least one unmodified transcript is still present in mutants. Ptpn21-/- knockout mice did not have an ocular phenotype, and IHC for rod- and cone-specific opsins detected no cone or rod abnormalities suggesting that PTPN21 loss has minimal to no contributory role towards the retinal phenotype in mutants. The variant leads to a deletion of the 3'-end of the SPATA7 transcript: XM_038545497.1:r.1,314_1,629delins[g.60,018,954-60,018,990], p.(XP_038401425.1: Asp361GlufsTer2), reducing the predicted protein from 595 to 361 AA. Ultrastructure expansion microscopy (U-ExM) enabled the detection of a distinct SPATA7 signal around the transition zone of the primary cilium in photoreceptors and fibroblasts of WT dogs, which was absent in affected dog. We posit that SPATA7 deficiency is the main cause of the condition, and propose this disease as a model for the SPATA7-related form of cone-rod dystrophy in humans. Our work shows an example of functional refinement of a multi-gene deletion variant using a multi-technique approach.
Indexed as
BlindnessCone-Rod DystrophiesDog DiseasesRetinal DegenerationAnimalsDogsFemaleGene DeletionGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansMaleMicePedigreePhenotypeRetinaRetinal Cone Photoreceptor Cells
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.
Two genes, one culprit - a functional candidate validation of a SPATA7 deletion in dogs with day blindness/retinal degeneration. · full record | OpenQuestion