ArticlePloS one2024
Comparative transcriptomics of Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) across stages of prey capture and digestion.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Immunocytochemical Analysis of the Wall Ingrowths and Cell Wall Microdomains in the Digestive Glands of Venus' Flytrap.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Carnivorous Plants as Model Species for Recent and Further Studies.Results and problems in cell differentiation · 2026Review
- How the diversity in digestion in carnivorous plants may have evolved.The New phytologist · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Venus flytrap, Dionaea muscipula, is perhaps the world's best-known botanical carnivore. The act of prey capture and digestion along with its rapidly closing, charismatic traps make this species a compelling model for studying the evolution and fundamental biology of carnivorous plants. There is a growing body of research on the genome, transcriptome, and digestome of Dionaea muscipula, but surprisingly limited information on changes in trap transcript abundance over time since feeding. Here we present the results of a comparative transcriptomics project exploring the transcriptomic changes across seven timepoints in a 72-hour time series of prey digestion and three timepoints directly comparing triggered traps with and without prey items. We document a dynamic response to prey capture including changes in abundance of transcripts with Gene Ontology (GO) annotations related to digestion and nutrient uptake. Comparisons of traps with and without prey documented 174 significantly differentially expressed genes at 1 hour after triggering and 151 genes with significantly different abundances at 24 hours. Approximately 50% of annotated protein-coding genes in Venus flytrap genome exhibit change (10041 of 21135) in transcript abundance following prey capture. Whereas peak abundance for most of these genes was observed within 3 hours, an expression cluster of 3009 genes exhibited continuously increasing abundance over the 72-hour sampling period, and transcript for these genes with GO annotation terms including both catabolism and nutrient transport may continue to accumulate beyond 72 hours.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.