DOCSLIB.ORG

Two New Neotropical Species of Drosophilinae (Diptera: Drosophilidae) from Uruguay

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Two New Neotropical Species of Drosophilinae (Diptera: Drosophilidae) from Uruguay ZOOLOGIA 33(6): e20160142 ISSN 1984-4689 (online) urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:52E45989-B00A-403F-9DA9-6D9553C313BB www.scielo.br/zool TAXONOMY AND NOMENCLATURE Two new Neotropical species of Drosophilinae (Diptera: Drosophilidae) from Uruguay Beatriz Goñi1* & Carlos R. Vilela2 1Sección Genética Evolutiva, Instituto de Biología, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de la República. Iguá 4225, Montevideo 11400, Uruguay. 2Departamento de Genética e Biologia Evolutiva, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo. Caixa Postal 11461, 05422-970 São Paulo, SP, Brazil. E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT. Two new species of Drosophilidae from Uruguay are described and illustrated: Drosophila montevidensis sp. nov. (Holotype male in MZSP: Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de la República, Montevideo city, Department of Montevideo), and Scaptomyza pipinna sp. nov. (Holotype male in MZSP: Sarandí del Consejo, near north shore of Laguna de Castillos, De- partment of Rocha). The former species belongs to the D. tripunctata group and is sibling to Drosophila nappae Vilela, Valente & Basso-da-Silva, 2004, differing mainly in characters of the aedeagus. The latter is closely related to Scaptomyza striaticeps Wheeler & Takada, 1966, from which it can be distinguished by color and terminalia characters. The new Drosophila species was successfully cultured in a modified banana-agar medium which is provided. Photomicrographs of mitotic and meiotic chromosomes of D. montevidensis sp. nov. are also included. KEY WORDS. Argentina, Drosophila tripunctata group, karyotypes, Mesoscaptomyza, taxonomy. For decades, Drosophila nappae Vilela, Valente & Bas- in southern Uruguay by net sweeping over fallen, decaying fleshy so-da-Silva, 2004, a South American species belonging to the D. seeds of maidenhair tree (Ginkgo biloba L.) and decaying fruits of tripunctata group, was misidentified under the nominal species both native and exotic plants or emerging from such fruits (GOÑI Drosophila angustibucca Duda, 1925 described from Central et al. 1997, 1998), or attracted to dung and carrion baited pitfall America. Drosophila angustibucca is apparently endemic to Costa traps (GOÑI et al. 2012). Only by checking the male terminalia, Rica and adjacent countries, whereas D. nappae occurs in the mainly the shape of their aedeagi, of this pair of sibling species Atlantic forest of southeastern and southern Brazil and most it is possible to tell them apart. Additionally, a single male of an probably also in Paraguay (VILELA et al. 2004). undescribed species of Scaptomyza Hardy, 1849, closely related to During a preliminary survey of the drosophilid fauna of the Colombian Scaptomyza striaticeps Wheeler & Takada, 1966, Uruguay, conducted during the last two decades, the first author was collected by net sweeping over grass by our colleague Maria collected some specimens of an unknown Drosophila Fallén, 1823 E. Martínez at the eastern wetlands (bañados in Spanish) of the species which had been cited by GOÑI et al. (1997, 1998) as D. Uruguayan Department of Rocha. gr. tripunctata and as an unidentified species of theD. tripunctata The purpose of the present paper is to erect names to group, respectively. At that time, Goñi and colleagues believed these two species new to science, and to present their formal that their unknown specimens of Drosophila belonged to an descriptions, including the karyotype description of the new undescribed species, which would be later described as D. nappae Drosophila species. (VILELA et al. 2004) from flies collected at Porto Alegre, state of Rio Grande do Sul, southern Brazil. More recently, we became MATERIAL AND METHODS convinced that the unidentified specimens from Uruguay cited by GOÑI et al. (1997, 1998) do not belong either to D. angustibucca Specimens examined are deposited in the Entomological or to Drosophila nappae, but are members of a sibling and still Collection (Diptera), Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de la undescribed species referred to as D. aff. nappae in GOÑI et al. República, Montevideo, Uruguay (FCE-D) and the Museu de (2012). The specimens unidentified to species rank were collected Zoologia, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (MZSP). ZOOLOGIA 33(6): e20160142 | DOI: 10.1590/S1984-4689zool-20160142 | December 15, 2016 1 / 13 B. Goñi & C.R. Vilela Refer to BÄCHLI et al. (2004) for the terminology used in Cooking instructions. Prepare a wet mixture of tap water the descriptions, to VILELA (1983) and VILELA & BÄCHLI (1990) for and agar, bring it to a boil in a pot, stirring once in a while to measurements and indices, to KANESHIRO (1969) and WHEELER prevent clumping, add banana purée and brewer yeast solution & KAMBYSELLIS (1966) for details on the methods of preparing and boil it again, stir the mixture, turn off fire and let it cool to the terminalia. Type labels include clarifying notes in square about 60 °C before adding Nipagin. Stir well, pour it into cylin- brackets; a slash indicates a label change. In the descriptions, drical glass vials (20 x 100 mm) and plug them. After cooling average measurements are followed by range in parentheses. All and drying at room temperature the vials medium may be pre- types were dissected and their terminalia photomicrographed. served for up to three weeks in the refrigerator (ca. 8 °C). After The disarticulated terminalia are kept in a microvial filled with transferring the imagines to a new vial, a tiny ball (about the glycerin and attached by the stopper to the pinned specimen. size of a homeopathic pill) of live baker’s yeast should be added. Photomicrographs of imagoes were taken with an Olympus cam- The following tips may be useful to maintain the strains era (PM2) loaded with an analog 35 mm Fujichrome Professional at a temperature of 18 °C, ideal for keeping specimens of most of 64T film and attached to an Olympus stereomicroscope (SZ11) the species of the D. tripunctata group in laboratory. The emerged with a ring illuminator. Photomicrographs of the aedeagi+aedea- adults are to be transferred to new vials once a week. Turning gal apodeme, inner spermathecal capsules, and oviscapt valves and keeping the vials upside down until the adult flies reach were taken using a black & white APX25 Agfa Pan analog film sexual maturity (ca. two weeks) and also during the subsequent in Zeiss photomicroscope. The originally analog films (slides week, reduces the adult mortality caused mainly by the cataleptic and negatives) were later converted to a digital format using behaviour observed in many of these flies whenever they are an Epson scanner (Perfection 4180 Photo). Line drawings of disturbed (FROTA-PESSOA 1954). The vials from the first two weeks the terminalia were made using a Zeiss microscope, under an are usually devoid of eggs and larvae and must be discarded. The objective 40x, attached to a camera lucida (1.8x). Whenever in sexually mature flies (ca. 14-day old) are transferred into the new the same plate, all line drawings were drawn to the same scale vial kept upside down to oviposit for one week. Later on, flies can and all photomicrographs were taken and enlarged to the same be either discarded or transferred into new vial, if needed. Alterna- magnification. tively, sexually mature flies could be transferred to vials with pow- Four Drosophila isofemale lines (coded Q23F2, Q37F53, dered milk-agar medium for egg laying and larval development Q37F56, and Q49F1, see material examined) were used as non- (BÄCHLI et al. 2000). No additional yeast needs to be added at this type material to determine the species karyotypes and analyze point. One week later, the medium becomes double-layered due the male meiotic chromosomes. The latter strain was also used to the presence of large amount of growing larvae. At this stage for the analyses of the general body and eye colors, eggs and ca. four V-shaped filter paper strips (ca. 1,8 x 10 cm) are inserted puparia. Additionally, adult males and females from the line into the medium to reduce the excess of humidity. Q37F55 were double mounted and photomicrographed. For Mitotic and meiotic chromosomes of the new Drosophila comparison purposes, male and female specimens of D. nappae species were obtained by applying the technique of IMAI et al. sampled from two isofemale lines (I42F56 and I73F254), derived (1977, 1988) and MATSUDA et al. (1983). Cytology procedure from wild females collected at the Forest Reserve of IB-USP (São follows VILELA & GOÑI (2015). Cytological preparations were Paulo city, state of São Paulo, Brazil), 26-28.III.1996 and 26-28. made from single individuals by using the isofemale lines cod- VIII.1997 respectively, V. Ratcov and C.R. Vilela leg. (MZSP), plus ed Q23F2 and Q37F53 (see material examined, and observed ® one male of the same species collected at Morro Santana, Porto in an Olympus BX60 microscope equipped with an Olympus ® Alegre (state of Rio Grande do Sul), III.1995, L. Basso da Silva leg. U-MAD-3 camera, under an objective 100x and 1.6x optovar (MZSP) were dissected and their terminalia photomicrographed. magnification changer. Selected mitotic and meiotic cells were ® The cited isofemale lines were cultured in a cheap, long-lasting, photomicrographed using the Image-Pro Plus version 5.1 image analysis software and further edited in GIMP 2.8.14 (GNU Image and suitably modified banana-agar culture medium (detailed Manipulation Program). below) at constant temperature (18 ± 1 °C) and photoperiod (13h light: 10h dark). Because this modified medium is also used to culture many other species of this genus, including Drosophila TAXONOMY melanogaster Meigen, 1830, and its mutants, it is worthwhile Drosophilidae Rondani, 1856 mentioning here its recipe, as detailed below. Ingredients. Tap water (1000 ml), agar (10 g), five medi- Drosophila (Drosophila) montevidensis sp. nov. um-sized, peeled, and overripe bananas (preferentially Nanica Figs. 1-8, 17-49, 54-55, 58-63 cultivar) blended in advance with 125 ml of tap water (to get a urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:DDAFE6AD-5838-4141-84F9-2DB89A1DE856 banana purée, which may also be stored at -20 °C for up to one D.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Male Terminalia of Seven American Species of Drosophila
    Alpine Entomology 1 2017, 17–31 | DOI 10.3897/alpento.1.20669 The male terminalia of seven American species of Drosophila (Diptera, Drosophilidae) Carlos Ribeiro Vilela1 1 Departamento de Genética e Biologia Evolutiva, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, Rua do Matão 277, Cidade Universitária “Armando de Salles Oliveira”, São Paulo - SP, 05508-090, Brazil http://zoobank.org/197D5E09-957B-4804-BF78-23F853C68B0A Corresponding author: Carlos Ribeiro Vilela ([email protected]) Abstract Received 28 August 2017 The male terminalia of seven species of Drosophila endemic to the New World are de- Accepted 28 September 2017 scribed or redescribed and illustrated: one in the hydei subgroup (D. guayllabambae) and Published 20 November 2017 four in the mulleri subgroup (D. arizonae, D. navojoa, D. nigrodumosa, and D. sonorae) of the repleta group; one in the sticta group (D. sticta) and one so far unassigned to group Academic editor: (D. comosa). The D. guayllabambae terminalia redescription is based on a wild-caught Patrick Rohner fly. The redescriptions of the terminalia of the four species in the mulleri subgroup are based on strain specimens, while those of D. sticta and D. comosa terminalia are based Key Words on their holotypes. D. guayllabambae seems to be a strictly mountainous species of the Ecuadorian and Peruvian Andes. D. nigrodumosa is apparently endemic to Venezuela, oc- Drosophila subgenus curring in the Andes as well as at lower altitudes. The remaining five occurs only at lower Drosophilinae altitudes of the American continent. The detailed line drawings depicted in this paper aim line drawings to help interested taxonomists to tell those species apart.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera: Drosophilidae) in North-Eastern Argentina Revista De La Sociedad Entomológica Argentina, Vol
    Revista de la Sociedad Entomológica Argentina ISSN: 0373-5680 [email protected] Sociedad Entomológica Argentina Argentina LAVAGNINO, Nicolás J.; CARREIRA, Valeria P.; MENSCH, Julián; HASSON, Esteban; FANARA, Juan J. Geographic distribution and hosts of Zaprionus indianus (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in North-Eastern Argentina Revista de la Sociedad Entomológica Argentina, vol. 67, núm. 1-2, 2008, pp. 189-192 Sociedad Entomológica Argentina Buenos Aires, Argentina Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=322028482021 Cómo citar el artículo Número completo Sistema de Información Científica Más información del artículo Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal Página de la revista en redalyc.org Proyecto académico sin fines de lucro, desarrollado bajo la iniciativa de acceso abierto ISSN 0373-5680 Rev. Soc. Entomol. Argent. 67 (1-2): 189-192, 2008 189 NOTA CIENTÍFICA Geographic distribution and hosts of Zaprionus indianus (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in North-Eastern Argentina LAVAGNINO, Nicolás J., Valeria P. CARREIRA, Julián MENSCH, Esteban HASSON and Juan J. FANARA Laboratorio de Evolución. Departamento de Ecología, Genética y Evolución. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Pabellón II. Ciudad Universitaria. C1428HA. Buenos Aires, Argentina; e-mail: [email protected] Distribución geográfica y hospedadores de Zaprionus indianus (Diptera: Drosophilidae) en el noreste de Argentina RESUMEN. El primer registro publicado de la especie africana Zaprionus indianus Gupta 1970 en el continente Americano se refiere a individuos observados en frutos caídos de «caqui» (Diospyros kaki Linnaei) en la ciudad de São Paulo, (Brasil) en Marzo de 1999. Desde esa fecha, esta especie ha colonizado ambientes naturales y perturbados en todo el continente.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermal Sensitivity of the Spiroplasma-Drosophila Hydei Protective Symbiosis: the Best of 2 Climes, the Worst of Climes
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.30.070938; this version posted May 2, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 1 Thermal sensitivity of the Spiroplasma-Drosophila hydei protective symbiosis: The best of 2 climes, the worst of climes. 3 4 Chris Corbin, Jordan E. Jones, Ewa Chrostek, Andy Fenton & Gregory D. D. Hurst* 5 6 Institute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Crown 7 Street, Liverpool L69 7ZB, UK 8 9 * For correspondence: [email protected] 10 11 Short title: Thermal sensitivity of a protective symbiosis 12 13 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.30.070938; this version posted May 2, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 14 Abstract 15 16 The outcome of natural enemy attack in insects has commonly been found to be influenced 17 by the presence of protective symbionts in the host. The degree to which protection 18 functions in natural populations, however, will depend on the robustness of the phenotype 19 to variation in the abiotic environment. We studied the impact of a key environmental 20 parameter – temperature – on the efficacy of the protective effect of the symbiont 21 Spiroplasma on its host Drosophila hydei, against attack by the parasitoid wasp Leptopilina 22 heterotoma.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Species of Neotropical Drosophila (Diptera, Drosophilidae)
    Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 61 (2017) 232–238 REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE Entomologia A Journal on Insect Diversity and Evolution www.rbentomologia.com Systematics, Morphology and Biogeography A new species of Neotropical Drosophila (Diptera, Drosophilidae) belonging to the guarani group a a,∗ b Vilma Ratcov , Carlos R. Vilela , Beatriz Goni˜ a Universidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Genética e Biologia Evolutiva, São Paulo, SP, Brazil b Universidad de la República, Facultad de Ciencias, Instituto de Biología, Sección Genética Evolutiva, Montevideo, Uruguay a r a b s t r a c t t i c l e i n f o Article history: Drosophila butantan sp. nov., a species belonging to the guarani group and closely related to Drosophila Received 2 March 2017 nigrifemur from Bolivia, is described based on a female, and some of its offspring, collected at the forest Accepted 8 June 2017 reserve of the Instituto de Biociências da Universidade de São Paulo, Cidade Universitária “Armando de Salles Available online 22 June 2017 Oliveira”, São Paulo City, state of São Paulo, Brazil. Although externally similar, the two apparently forest- Associate Editor: Sarah Oliveira dwelling species can be told apart by having distinct oviscapt valves and spermathecal introverts and tips. Accordingly, a proposal is made to also include D. nigrifemur, a previously unassigned species, in the Keywords: guarani group. The two species seem to be also related to Drosophila alexandrei and Drosophila guaraja Atlantic forest as indicated by their external morphology, their elongate spermathecae and the not so sharply pointed Brazil oviscapt valves. The karyotypes of the new species differ from those described for D.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded Transcribed from an RNA Template Directly Onto a Consensus Sequences of Jockey Families Deposited in the Tambones Et Al
    Tambones et al. Mobile DNA (2019) 10:43 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13100-019-0184-1 RESEARCH Open Access High frequency of horizontal transfer in Jockey families (LINE order) of drosophilids Izabella L. Tambones1, Annabelle Haudry2, Maryanna C. Simão1 and Claudia M. A. Carareto1* Abstract Background: The use of large-scale genomic analyses has resulted in an improvement of transposable element sampling and a significant increase in the number of reported HTT (horizontal transfer of transposable elements) events by expanding the sampling of transposable element sequences in general and of specific families of these elements in particular, which were previously poorly sampled. In this study, we investigated the occurrence of HTT events in a group of elements that, until recently, were uncommon among the HTT records in Drosophila – the Jockey elements, members of the LINE (long interspersed nuclear element) order of non-LTR (long terminal repeat) retrotransposons. The sequences of 111 Jockey families deposited in Repbase that met the criteria of the analysis were used to identify Jockey sequences in 48 genomes of Drosophilidae (genus Drosophila, subgenus Sophophora: melanogaster, obscura and willistoni groups; subgenus Drosophila: immigrans, melanica, repleta, robusta, virilis and grimshawi groups; subgenus Dorsilopha: busckii group; genus/subgenus Zaprionus and genus Scaptodrosophila). Results: Phylogenetic analyses revealed 72 Jockey families in 41 genomes. Combined analyses revealed 15 potential HTT events between species belonging to different
    [Show full text]
  • Drosophila Suzukii
    Archival copy. For current information, see the OSU Extension Catalog: https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/em9026 Protecting Garden Fruits from Spotted Wing Drosophila Drosophila suzukii EM 9026 • April 2011 potted wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii; SWD) is a new, invasive pest that attacks stone Sfruits and berries. This pest is native to Japan, where the first reports of this “vinegar fly” date to 1916, and has been established in Hawaii since the early 1980s, although no noticeable damage has been reported there. On the mainland United States, SWD was first discovered in the fall of 2008, maturing on raspberry and strawberry fruits in California. In 2009, SWD was reported in Oregon, Washington, Florida, and British Columbia, Canada. In 2010, SWD flies were caught in monitoring traps in Figure 1. Following the 2009 and 2010 growing seasons, Michigan, Utah, North Carolina, South Carolina, and spotted wing drosophila was known to be present in Benton, Clackamas, Columbia, Douglas, Hood River, Louisiana. In 2011, SWD was reported for the first Jackson, Josephine, Lane, Linn, Lincoln, Marion, time in Baja, Mexico. Multnomah, Polk, Wasco, Washington, Umatilla, and In Oregon, SWD has been confirmed in 17 coun- Yamhill counties. SWD presence was confirmed by ties (figure 1). These counties are home to several identifying flies collected in traps or fly larvae in infested fruit. commercial fruit producers as well as many home Image by Helmuth Rogg, Oregon Department of Agriculture, gardeners who tend backyard berries and fruits. reproduced by permission. Given the rapid spread of SWD in Oregon and across the United States, it is reasonable to suspect that SWD is widespread, well established, and most likely present in additional counties and states.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera – Brachycera
    Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e4187 doi: 10.3897/BDJ.3.e4187 Data Paper Fauna Europaea: Diptera – Brachycera Thomas Pape‡§, Paul Beuk , Adrian Charles Pont|, Anatole I. Shatalkin¶, Andrey L. Ozerov¶, Andrzej J. Woźnica#, Bernhard Merz¤, Cezary Bystrowski«», Chris Raper , Christer Bergström˄, Christian Kehlmaier˅, David K. Clements¦, David Greathead†,ˀ, Elena Petrovna Kamenevaˁ, Emilia Nartshuk₵, Frederik T. Petersenℓ, Gisela Weber ₰, Gerhard Bächli₱, Fritz Geller-Grimm₳, Guy Van de Weyer₴, Hans-Peter Tschorsnig₣, Herman de Jong₮, Jan-Willem van Zuijlen₦, Jaromír Vaňhara₭, Jindřich Roháček₲, Joachim Ziegler‽, József Majer ₩, Karel Hůrka†,₸, Kevin Holston ‡‡, Knut Rognes§§, Lita Greve-Jensen||, Lorenzo Munari¶¶, Marc de Meyer##, Marc Pollet ¤¤, Martin C. D. Speight««, Martin John Ebejer»», Michel Martinez˄˄, Miguel Carles-Tolrá˅˅, Mihály Földvári¦¦, Milan Chvála ₸, Miroslav Bartákˀˀ, Neal L. Evenhuisˁˁ, Peter J. Chandler₵₵, Pierfilippo Cerrettiℓℓ, Rudolf Meier ₰₰, Rudolf Rozkosny₭, Sabine Prescher₰, Stephen D. Gaimari₱₱, Tadeusz Zatwarnicki₳₳, Theo Zeegers₴₴, Torsten Dikow₣₣, Valery A. Korneyevˁ, Vera Andreevna Richter†,₵, Verner Michelsen‡, Vitali N. Tanasijtshuk₵, Wayne N. Mathis₣₣, Zdravko Hubenov₮₮, Yde de Jong ₦₦,₭₭ ‡ Natural History Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark § Natural History Museum Maastricht / Diptera.info, Maastricht, Netherlands | Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Oxford, United Kingdom ¶ Zoological Museum, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia # Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wrocław,
    [Show full text]
  • Highly Contiguous Assemblies of 101 Drosophilid Genomes
    TOOLS AND RESOURCES Highly contiguous assemblies of 101 drosophilid genomes Bernard Y Kim1†*, Jeremy R Wang2†, Danny E Miller3, Olga Barmina4, Emily Delaney4, Ammon Thompson4, Aaron A Comeault5, David Peede6, Emmanuel RR D’Agostino6, Julianne Pelaez7, Jessica M Aguilar7, Diler Haji7, Teruyuki Matsunaga7, Ellie E Armstrong1, Molly Zych8, Yoshitaka Ogawa9, Marina Stamenkovic´-Radak10, Mihailo Jelic´ 10, Marija Savic´ Veselinovic´ 10, Marija Tanaskovic´ 11, Pavle Eric´ 11, Jian-Jun Gao12, Takehiro K Katoh12, Masanori J Toda13, Hideaki Watabe14, Masayoshi Watada15, Jeremy S Davis16, Leonie C Moyle17, Giulia Manoli18, Enrico Bertolini18, Vladimı´rKosˇtˇa´ l19, R Scott Hawley20, Aya Takahashi9, Corbin D Jones6, Donald K Price21, Noah Whiteman7, Artyom Kopp4, Daniel R Matute6†*, Dmitri A Petrov1†* 1Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, United States; 2Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States; 3Department of Pediatrics, Division of Genetic Medicine, University of Washington and Seattle Children’s Hospital, Seattle, United States; 4Department of Evolution and Ecology, University of California Davis, Davis, United States; 5School of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, United Kingdom; 6Biology Department, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States; 7Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States; 8Molecular and Cellular Biology Program, University of Washington, Seattle, United States; 9Department of 10 *For correspondence:
    [Show full text]
  • Highly Contiguous Assemblies of 101 Drosophilid Genomes
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Biology Faculty Publications Biology 7-19-2021 Highly Contiguous Assemblies of 101 Drosophilid Genomes Bernard Y. Kim Stanford University Jeremy R. Wang University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Danny E. Miller University of Washington Olga Barmina University of California, Davis Emily Delaney University of California, Davis See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/biology_facpub Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Genetics and Genomics Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Repository Citation Kim, Bernard Y.; Wang, Jeremy R.; Miller, Danny E.; Barmina, Olga; Delaney, Emily; Thompson, Ammon; Comeault, Aaron A.; Peede, David; D'Agostino, Emmanuel R. R.; Pelaez, Julianne; Aguilar, Jessica M.; Haji, Diler; Matsunaga, Teruyuki; Armstrong, Ellie E.; Zych, Molly; Ogawa, Yoshitaka; Stamenković-Radak, Marina; Jelić, Mihailo; Veselinović, Marija Savić; Tanasković, Marija; and Davis, Jeremy S., "Highly Contiguous Assemblies of 101 Drosophilid Genomes" (2021). Biology Faculty Publications. 215. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/biology_facpub/215 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biology at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biology Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Highly Contiguous Assemblies of 101 Drosophilid Genomes Digital Object Identifier (DOI) https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.66405 Notes/Citation Information Published in eLife, v. 10, e66405. © 2021, Kim et al. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
    [Show full text]
  • Drosophila As a Model for Infectious Diseases
    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Review Drosophila as a Model for Infectious Diseases J. Michael Harnish 1,2 , Nichole Link 1,2,3,† and Shinya Yamamoto 1,2,4,5,* 1 Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), Houston, TX 77030, USA; [email protected] (J.M.H.); [email protected] (N.L.) 2 Jan and Dan Duncan Neurological Research Institute, Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA 3 Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Houston, TX 77030, USA 4 Department of Neuroscience, BCM, Houston, TX 77030, USA 5 Development, Disease Models and Therapeutics Graduate Program, BCM, Houston, TX 77030, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-832-824-8119 † Current Affiliation: Department of Neurobiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA. Abstract: The fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, has been used to understand fundamental principles of genetics and biology for over a century. Drosophila is now also considered an essential tool to study mechanisms underlying numerous human genetic diseases. In this review, we will discuss how flies can be used to deepen our knowledge of infectious disease mechanisms in vivo. Flies make effective and applicable models for studying host-pathogen interactions thanks to their highly con- served innate immune systems and cellular processes commonly hijacked by pathogens. Drosophila researchers also possess the most powerful, rapid, and versatile tools for genetic manipulation in multicellular organisms. This allows for robust experiments in which specific pathogenic proteins can be expressed either one at a time or in conjunction with each other to dissect the molecular functions of each virulent factor in a cell-type-specific manner.
    [Show full text]
  • A-Glycerophosphate Dehydrogenase Within the Genus Drosophila (Dipteran Evolution/Unit Evolutionary Period) GLEN E
    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 74, No. 2, pp. 684-688, February 1977 Genetics Microcomplement fixation studies on the evolution of a-glycerophosphate dehydrogenase within the genus Drosophila (dipteran evolution/unit evolutionary period) GLEN E. COLLIER AND Ross J. MACINTYRE Section of Genetics, Development and Physiology, Plant Science Building, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853 Communicated by Adrian M. Srb, November 8,1976 ABSTRACT Antisera were prepared against purified a- least in D. melanogaster, for rapid production of the energy glycerophosphate dehydrogenase (EC 1.1.1.8) (aGPDH) from needed for flight (7-9). Drosophila melanogaster, D. virifis, and D. busckii. The im- munological distances between the enzymes from the 3 species The third criterion is that the protein should be evolving and those from 31 additional drosophilid species agree in gen- relatively slowly. Although cytogenetic analysis and interspe- eral with the accepted phylogeny of the genus. These data per- cific hybridization are adequate for est*blishing phylogenetic mit an estimate that the subgenus Sophophora diverged 52 relationships among closely related species, a protein that has million years ago from the line leading to the subgenus Droso- changed slowly is particularly useful for establishing the rela- phila. The antiserum against melanogaster aGPDH was ca- pable of distinguishing alielic variants of aGPDH. On the basis tionships among species groups, subgenera, genera, and even of presumed single amino acid substitutions, no-drosophilid families or orders. Brosemer et al. (10) and Fink et al. (11) have aGPDH tested differed from the melanogaster enzyme by more established with immunological tests that the structure of than eight or nine substitutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Genome Size Evolution Differs Between Drosophila Subgenera with Striking Differences in Male and Female Genome Size in Sophophora
    INVESTIGATION Genome Size Evolution Differs Between Drosophila Subgenera with Striking Differences in Male and Female Genome Size in Sophophora Carl E. Hjelmen,*,†,1 Heath Blackmon,† V. Renee Holmes,* Crystal G. Burrus,† and J. Spencer Johnston* *Department of Biology and †Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 ORCID IDs: 0000-0003-3061-6458 (C.E.H.); 0000-0002-5433-4036 (H.B.); 0000-0002-1034-3707 (V.R.H.); 0000-0003-4792-2945 (J.S.J.) ABSTRACT Genome size varies across the tree of life, with no clear correlation to organismal complexity or KEYWORDS coding sequence, but with differences in non-coding regions. Phylogenetic methods have recently been Genome size incorporated to further disentangle this enigma, yet most of these studies have focused on widely diverged sex chromosome species. Few have compared patterns of genome size change in closely related species with known Drosophila structural differences in the genome. As a consequence, the relationship between genome size and phylogenetic differences in chromosome number or inter-sexual differences attributed to XY systems are largely comparative unstudied. We hypothesize that structural differences associated with chromosome number and X-Y methods chromosome differentiation, should result in differing rates and patterns of genome size change. In this study, we utilize the subgenera within the Drosophila to ask if patterns and rates of genome size change differ between closely related species with differences in chromosome numbers and states of the XY system. Genome sizes for males and females of 152 species are used to answer these questions (with 92 newly added or updated estimates).
    [Show full text]