↓ Skip to main content

Tissue-specific transcriptomics and proteomics of a filarial nematode and its Wolbachia endosymbiont

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tissue-specific transcriptomics and proteomics of a filarial nematode and its Wolbachia endosymbiont
Published in
BMC Genomics, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12864-015-2083-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashley N. Luck, Kathryn G. Anderson, Colleen M. McClung, Nathan C. VerBerkmoes, Jeremy M. Foster, Michelle L. Michalski, Barton E. Slatko

Abstract

Filarial nematodes cause debilitating human diseases. While treatable, recent evidence suggests drug resistance is developing, necessitating the development of novel targets and new treatment options. Although transcriptomic and proteomic studies around the nematode life cycle have greatly enhanced our knowledge, whole organism approaches have not provided spatial resolution of gene expression, which can be gained by examining individual tissues. Generally, due to their small size, tissue dissection of human-infecting filarial nematodes remains extremely challenging. However, canine heartworm disease is caused by a closely related and much larger filarial nematode, Dirofilaria immitis. As with many other filarial nematodes, D. immitis contains Wolbachia, an obligate bacterial endosymbiont present in the hypodermis and developing oocytes within the uterus. Here, we describe the first concurrent tissue-specific transcriptomic and proteomic profiling of a filarial nematode (D. immitis) and its Wolbachia (wDi) in order to better understand tissue functions and identify tissue-specific antigens that may be used for the development of new diagnostic and therapeutic tools. Adult D. immitis worms were dissected into female body wall (FBW), female uterus (FU), female intestine (FI), female head (FH), male body wall (MBW), male testis (MT), male intestine (MI), male head (MH) and 10.1186/s12864-015-2083-2 male spicule (MS) and used to prepare transcriptomic and proteomic libraries. Transcriptomic and proteomic analysis of several D. immitis tissues identified many biological functions enriched within certain tissues. Hierarchical clustering of the D. immitis tissue transcriptomes, along with the recently published whole-worm adult male and female D. immitis transcriptomes, revealed that the whole-worm transcriptome is typically dominated by transcripts originating from reproductive tissue. The uterus appeared to have the most variable transcriptome, possibly due to age. Although many functions are shared between the reproductive tissues, the most significant differences in gene expression were observed between the uterus and testis. Interestingly, wDi gene expression in the male and female body wall is fairly similar, yet slightly different to that of Wolbachia gene expression in the uterus. Proteomic methods verified 32 % of the predicted D. immitis proteome, including over 700 hypothetical proteins of D. immitis. Of note, hypothetical proteins were among some of the most abundant Wolbachia proteins identified, which may fulfill some important yet still uncharacterized biological function. The spatial resolution gained from this parallel transcriptomic and proteomic analysis adds to our understanding of filarial biology and serves as a resource with which to develop future therapeutic strategies against filarial nematodes and their Wolbachia endosymbionts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 29%
Student > Master 7 13%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 16 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 17 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 June 2016.
All research outputs
#6,869,236
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#2,670
of 11,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,735
of 294,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#77
of 390 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,305 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,119 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 390 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.