Drashti R Parmar, Nikolas P Johnston, James F Wallman, Krzysztof Szpila
{"title":"Blowfly genomics: Current insights, knowledge gaps, and future perspectives.","authors":"Drashti R Parmar, Nikolas P Johnston, James F Wallman, Krzysztof Szpila","doi":"10.1016/j.cois.2024.101305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Blowflies (Calliphoridae) form a diverse, species-rich group, yet publicly available genome assemblies are limited to only sixteen species despite recent genomic advances. This knowledge gap extends to mitogenomes and barcode databases, which mainly focus on medically and veterinary-important species. While blowfly phylogenetics has progressed, additional genome sequencing is crucial for various subfamilies given their diverse life histories. This review presents a quantitative overview of available genetic information for blowflies, highlighting substantial gaps in public databases. DNA barcodes, mitogenomes and genomes represent only 16.5% (342 species), ~3% (53 species) and <1% (16 species) of known family diversity, respectively. While 183 genomics-related calliphorid BioProjects are recorded by NCBI, many subfamilies and genera have limited or no genomic representation, impacting studies on identification, systematics, phylogenetics and evolution. We stress the urgent need for high-quality reference genomes and highlight target species representing all blowfly subfamilies to support new era of rapid, low-cost genomic research.</p>","PeriodicalId":11038,"journal":{"name":"Current opinion in insect science","volume":" ","pages":"101305"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current opinion in insect science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2024.101305","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Blowflies (Calliphoridae) form a diverse, species-rich group, yet publicly available genome assemblies are limited to only sixteen species despite recent genomic advances. This knowledge gap extends to mitogenomes and barcode databases, which mainly focus on medically and veterinary-important species. While blowfly phylogenetics has progressed, additional genome sequencing is crucial for various subfamilies given their diverse life histories. This review presents a quantitative overview of available genetic information for blowflies, highlighting substantial gaps in public databases. DNA barcodes, mitogenomes and genomes represent only 16.5% (342 species), ~3% (53 species) and <1% (16 species) of known family diversity, respectively. While 183 genomics-related calliphorid BioProjects are recorded by NCBI, many subfamilies and genera have limited or no genomic representation, impacting studies on identification, systematics, phylogenetics and evolution. We stress the urgent need for high-quality reference genomes and highlight target species representing all blowfly subfamilies to support new era of rapid, low-cost genomic research.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Insect Science is a new systematic review journal that aims to provide specialists with a unique and educational platform to keep up–to–date with the expanding volume of information published in the field of Insect Science. As this is such a broad discipline, we have determined themed sections each of which is reviewed once a year.
The following 11 areas are covered by Current Opinion in Insect Science.
-Ecology
-Insect genomics
-Global Change Biology
-Molecular Physiology (Including Immunity)
-Pests and Resistance
-Parasites, Parasitoids and Biological Control
-Behavioural Ecology
-Development and Regulation
-Social Insects
-Neuroscience
-Vectors and Medical and Veterinary Entomology
There is also a section that changes every year to reflect hot topics in the field.
Section Editors, who are major authorities in their area, are appointed by the Editors of the journal. They divide their section into a number of topics, ensuring that the field is comprehensively covered and that all issues of current importance are emphasized. Section Editors commission articles from leading scientists on each topic that they have selected and the commissioned authors write short review articles in which they present recent developments in their subject, emphasizing the aspects that, in their opinion, are most important. In addition, they provide short annotations to the papers that they consider to be most interesting from all those published in their topic over the previous year.