Cited by 487Insect symbiosis and bacterial influencesPhytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogensGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Genome evolution in bacterial endosymbionts of insects

Wernegreen, Jennifer J.·2002·Nature Reviews Genetics

Abstract

Many insect species rely on intracellular bacterial symbionts for their viability and fecundity. Large-scale DNA-sequence analyses are revealing the forces that shape the evolution of these bacterial associates and the genetic basis of their specialization to an intracellular lifestyle. The full genome sequences of two obligate mutualists, Buchnera aphidicola of aphids and Wigglesworthia glossinidia of tsetse flies, reveal substantial gene loss and an integration of host and symbiont metabolic functions. Further genomic comparisons should reveal the generality of these features among bacterial mutualists and the extent to which they are shared with other intracellular bacteria, including obligate pathogens.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrg931

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Obligate endosymbionts have arisen multiple times among the -proteobacteria and are passed vertically from mother to child, thereby introducing convergent features in the bacterial genomes: gene loss, smaller genomes, lower GC content, and reduced thermal stability of proteins.

    “These obligate endosymbionts have arisen multiple times among the -proteobacteria (Husn ık et al. 2011) and are passed vertically from mother to child, thereby introducing convergent features in the bacterial genomes: gene loss, smaller genomes, lower GC content, and reduced thermal stability of proteins (Wernegreen 2002).”

    From RELAX: Detecting Relaxed Selection in a Phylogenetic Framework (2015) · cites this paper as Wernegreen 2002

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wernegreen, J. J.
Affiliations
Marine Biological Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Wernegreen, Jennifer J.
Venue
Nature Reviews Genetics
Published
2002-11
Volume
3
Issue
11
Pages
850-861
ISSN
  • 1471-0056 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0064
OpenAlex
W2014438907
Cited by
487
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 22
FWCI
1.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect symbiosis and bacterial influences
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Phytoplasmas and Hemiptera pathogens
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
endosymbiotic bacteria, insect symbionts, genome evolution, Buchnera aphidicola, Wigglesworthia glossinidia, gene loss, obligate mutualism, intracellular bacteria, obligate pathogens, genome sequencing
MeSH terms
Animals, Bacteria, Insecta, Mutation, Phylogeny, Symbiosis, Genome, Bacterial, Evolution, Molecular, Genomics, Genetic Drift

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review