The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Two genomes of highly polyphagous lepidopteran pests (Spodoptera frugiperda, Noctuidae) with different host-plant ranges
Open accessAbstract
Emergence of polyphagous herbivorous insects entails significant adaptation to recognize, detoxify and digest a variety of host-plants. Despite of its biological and practical importance - since insects eat 20% of crops - no exhaustive analysis of gene repertoires required for adaptations in generalist insect herbivores has previously been performed. The noctuid moth Spodoptera frugiperda ranks as one of the world’s worst agricultural pests. This insect is polyphagous while the majority of other lepidopteran herbivores are specialist. It consists of two morphologically indistinguishable strains (“C” and “R”) that have different host plant ranges. To describe the evolutionary mechanisms that both enable the emergence of polyphagous herbivory and lead to the shift in the host preference, we analyzed whole genome sequences from laboratory and natural populations of both strains. We observed huge expansions of genes associated with chemosensation and detoxification compared with specialist Lepidoptera. These expansions are largely due to tandem duplication, a possible adaptation mechanism enabling polyphagy. Individuals from natural C and R populations show significant genomic differentiation. We found signatures of positive selection in genes involved in chemoreception, detoxification and digestion, and copy number variation in the two latter gene families, suggesting an adaptive role for structural variation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
BUSCO: assessing genome assembly and annotation completeness with single-copy orthologs
Simão, F. A., Waterhouse, R. M., Ioannidis, P., Kriventseva, E. V., & Zdobnov, E. M. (2015) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btv351 · Cited by 13,344
Efficient de novo assembly of highly heterozygous genomes from whole-genome shotgun short reads
Kajitani, R., Toshimoto, K., Noguchi, H., Toyoda, A., Ogura, Y., Okuno, M., Yabana, M., Harada, M., Nagayasu, E., Maruyama, H., et al. (2014) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.170720.113 · Cited by 1,017
Cited by
(2022) · doi:10.1093/g3journal/jkac131 · Cited by 23
Insects evolved a monomeric histone-fold domain in the CENP-T protein family
Sankaranarayanan, S. R., Ulmer, J., Mørch, A., Ali-Ahmad, A., Sekulić, N., & Drinnenberg, I. A. (2025) · EMBO Reports · doi:10.1038/s44319-025-00603-5 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Gouin, A., Bretaudeau, A., Nam, K., Gimenez, S., Aury, J.-M., Duvic, B., Hilliou, F., Durand, N., Montagné, N., Darboux, I., Kuwar, S., Chertemps, T., Siaussat, D., Bretschneider, A., Moné, Y., Ahn, S.-J., Hänniger, S., Grenet, A.-S. G., Neunemann, D., Maumus, F., Luyten, I., Labadie, K., Xu, W., Koutroumpa, F., Escoubas, J.-M., Llopis, A., Maïbèche-Coisne, M., Salasc, F., Tomar, A., Anderson, A. R., Khan, S. A., Dumas, P., Orsucci, M., Guy, J., Belser, C., Alberti, A., Noel, B., Couloux, A., Mercier, J., Nidelet, S., Dubois, E., Liu, N.-Y., Boulogne, I., Mirabeau, O., Le Goff, G., Gordon, K., Oakeshott, J., Consoli, F. L., Volkoff, A.-N., Fescemyer, H. W., Marden, J. H., Luthe, D. S., Herrero, S., Heckel, D. G., Wincker, P., Kergoat, G. J., Amselem, J., Quesneville, H., Groot, A. T., Jacquin-Joly, E., Nègre, N., Lemaitre, C., Legeai, F., d’Alençon, E., & Fournier, P.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2017-09-25
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11816-11816
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2756293157
- Cited by
- 358
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 21.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.