Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 176

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Behavior-specific changes in transcriptional modules lead to distinct and predictable neurogenomic states

Chandrasekaran, Sriram, Ament, Seth A., Eddy, James A., Rodriguez-Zas, Sandra L., Schatz, Bruce R., Price, Nathan D., Robinson, Gene E.·2011·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Using brain transcriptomic profiles from 853 individual honey bees exhibiting 48 distinct behavioral phenotypes in naturalistic contexts, we report that behavior-specific neurogenomic states can be inferred from the coordinated action of transcription factors (TFs) and their predicted target genes. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering of these transcriptomic profiles showed three clusters that correspond to three ecologically important behavioral categories: aggression, maturation, and foraging. To explore the genetic influences potentially regulating these behavior-specific neurogenomic states, we reconstructed a brain transcriptional regulatory network (TRN) model. This brain TRN quantitatively predicts with high accuracy gene expression changes of more than 2,000 genes involved in behavior, even for behavioral phenotypes on which it was not trained, suggesting that there is a core set of TFs that regulates behavior-specific gene expression in the bee brain, and other TFs more specific to particular categories. TFs playing key roles in the TRN include well-known regulators of neural and behavioral plasticity, e.g., Creb , as well as TFs better known in other biological contexts, e.g., NF-κB (immunity). Our results reveal three insights concerning the relationship between genes and behavior. First, distinct behaviors are subserved by distinct neurogenomic states in the brain. Second, the neurogenomic states underlying different behaviors rely upon both shared and distinct transcriptional modules. Third, despite the complexity of the brain, simple linear relationships between TFs and their putative target genes are a surprisingly prominent feature of the networks underlying behavior.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1114093108

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Cited by

See all 176

Metadata

Authors
Chandrasekaran, S., Ament, S. A., Eddy, J. A., Rodriguez-Zas, S. L., Schatz, B. R., Price, N. D., & Robinson, G. E.
Affiliations
  • Center for Biophysics and Computational Biology,
  • Neuroscience Program,
  • Department of Bioengineering,
  • Department of Animal Sciences,
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2011-09-29
Volume
108
Issue
44
Pages
18020-18025
ISSN
  • 0027-8424
  • 1091-6490
Cited by
176
References
30
Language
en

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.