|
| |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online April 20, 2007
Journal of Experimental Biology 210, 1632-1640 (2007)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2007
doi: 10.1242/jeb.002691
Review Article |
Integrative physiology, functional genomics and the phenotype gap: a guide for comparative physiologists
Division of Molecular Genetics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G11 6NU, UK
e-mail: j.a.t.dow{at}bio.gla.ac.uk
Accepted 23 January 2007
Classical, curiosity-led comparative physiology finds itself at a crossroads. Major funding for classical physiology is becoming harder to find, as grant agencies focus on more molecular approaches or on science with more immediate strategic value to their respective countries. In turn, this shift in funding places Zoology and Animal Science departments under enormous stress: student numbers are buoyant, but how can research funding be maintained at high levels?
Our research group has argued for the redefinition of integrative physiology as the investigation of gene function in an organotypic context in the intact animal. Implicit in this definition is the use of transgenics and reverse genetics to manipulate gene function in a cell-specific manner; this in turn implies the use of a genetically tractable `model organism'. The significance of this definition is that it aligns integrative physiology with functional genomics. Again, functional genomics draws heavily on reverse genetics to elucidate the function of novel genes. The phenotype gap (the mismatch between what a genetic model organism's genome encodes and the reasons that it has historically been studied) emphasises the need to attract and empower functional biologists: can all 13 500 genes in Drosophila really be explained in terms of developmental biology? So, by embracing the integrative physiology manifesto, comparative physiologists can not only accelerate their own research, but their functional skills can make them indispensable in the post-genomic endeavour.
Key words: Drosophila melanogaster, Caenorhabditis elegans, Danio rerio, mouse, Malpighian tubule, bioinformatics
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
Related articles in JEB:
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. A. Satterlie, J. S. Pearse, and K. P. Sebens The black box, the creature from the Black Lagoon, August Krogh, and the dominant animal Integr. Comp. Biol., August 1, 2009; 49(2): 89 - 92. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. Mayer, N. Mayer, L. Chinn, R. L. Pinsonneault, D. Kroetz, and R. J. Bainton Evolutionary Conservation of Vertebrate Blood-Brain Barrier Chemoprotective Mechanisms in Drosophila J. Neurosci., March 18, 2009; 29(11): 3538 - 3550. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. R. Singh and S. X. Hou Multipotent stem cells in the Malpighian tubules of adult Drosophila melanogaster J. Exp. Biol., February 1, 2009; 212(3): 413 - 423. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. T. Dow Insights into the Malpighian tubule from functional genomics J. Exp. Biol., February 1, 2009; 212(3): 435 - 445. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. L Chown and K. J Gaston Macrophysiology for a changing world Proc R Soc B, July 7, 2008; 275(1642): 1469 - 1478. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Vogt, M. Huber, M. Thiemann, G. van den Boogaart, O. J. Schmitz, and C. D. Schubart Production of different phenotypes from the same genotype in the same environment by developmental variation J. Exp. Biol., February 15, 2008; 211(4): 510 - 523. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
