DOCSLIB.ORG

Drosophila (Fruit Fly) Antibodies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Drosophila (Fruit Fly) Antibodies Drosophila (Fruit fly) Antibodies gene_name sku Entry_Name Protein_Names Organism Length Identity GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4NFM7_DROWI GK22496 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 545 100.00% Drosophila pseudoobscura pseudoobscura (Fruit GSM1 ARP47383_P050 Q29MI7_DROPS GA16373 fly) 745 85.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4G964_DROPE GL19420 Drosophila persimilis (Fruit fly) 749 85.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4K7Z1_DROMO GI24202 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 829 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4ME39_DROVI GJ18475 (Fragment) Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 1996 84.00% Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4IZK1_DROGR GH17053 grimshawi) 428 91.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4MPU0_DROWI GK21539 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 809 92.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4L549_DROMO GI21590 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 169 85.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4QT30_DROSI GD21081 Drosophila simulans (Fruit fly) 1106 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4N831_DROWI GK11981 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 2365 85.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4MXW4_DROWI GK20641 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 876 85.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4MVT7_DROWI GK15139 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 757 78.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4L5W8_DROMO GI21807 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 1105 80.00% Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4JU59_DROGR GH16542 grimshawi) 889 85.00% Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4JNL5_DROGR GH24843 grimshawi) 2873 84.00% Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4JLN7_DROGR GH24478 grimshawi) 726 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B3MF55_DROAN GF11288 Drosophila ananassae (Fruit fly) 992 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B3M328_DROAN GF17020 Drosophila ananassae (Fruit fly) 1260 80.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 SICK_DROME Protein sickie Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly) 2197 84.00% Drosophila pseudoobscura pseudoobscura (Fruit GSM1 ARP47383_P050 Q292F7_DROPS GA15871 fly) 1918 92.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4PKZ3_DROYA GE23462 Drosophila yakuba (Fruit fly) 4027 91.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4P7D5_DROYA GE11705 Drosophila yakuba (Fruit fly) 261 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4N0N1_DROWI GK24450 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 5118 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4MLV6_DROWI GK17402 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 2328 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4MLB1_DROWI GK17513 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 1796 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4MEV3_DROVI GJ14889 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 113 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4MES2_DROVI GJ14872 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 1505 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4MCV6_DROVI GJ15316 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 238 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4M2F5_DROVI GJ18665 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 1505 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4LSY7_DROVI GJ20062 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 835 78.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4LQ71_DROVI GJ21991 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 1680 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4LQ26_DROVI GJ20905 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 567 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4LN58_DROVI GJ21077 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 310 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4L7K0_DROMO GI11185 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 514 85.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4L5W3_DROMO GI21805 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 539 78.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4L2S1_DROMO GI15166 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 1517 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4KXT3_DROMO GI12763 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 735 78.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4KRI0_DROMO GI21068 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 1547 84.00% Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4JSA6_DROGR GH22212 grimshawi) 776 84.00% Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4JMU7_DROGR GH24266 grimshawi) 110 84.00% Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4J273_DROGR GH14899 grimshawi) 1957 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4GS73_DROPE GL26321 Drosophila persimilis (Fruit fly) 677 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B4GDL5_DROPE GL10834 Drosophila persimilis (Fruit fly) 1411 92.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B3MYA3_DROAN GF22097 Drosophila ananassae (Fruit fly) 903 91.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B3MIK2_DROAN GF11088 Drosophila ananassae (Fruit fly) 1323 84.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 B3M416_DROAN GF10479 Drosophila ananassae (Fruit fly) 885 84.00% Ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase calypso (EC GSM1 ARP47383_P050 CALYP_DROVI 3.4.19.12) (BAP1 homolog) Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 462 84.00% Ankyrin repeat and KH domain- containing protein mask (Multiple ankyrin repeat single GSM1 ARP47383_P050 ANKHM_DROME KH domain-containing protein) Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly) 4001 91.00% GSM1 ARP47383_P050 Q9VUB7_DROME Ptip Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly) 2294 91.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B4M4A4_DROVI GJ10277 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 1215 78.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B4JQJ6_DROGR GH13708 grimshawi) 1822 81.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B3P4F6_DROER GG17196 Drosophila erecta (Fruit fly) 1149 81.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B3N7B3_DROER GG25285 Drosophila erecta (Fruit fly) 558 81.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam Drosophila pseudoobscura pseudoobscura (Fruit ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 Q296F0_DROPS GA15232 fly) 1181 90.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B4QWV7_DROSI GD19618 Drosophila simulans (Fruit fly) 1084 90.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B4I404_DROSE GM10634 Drosophila sechellia (Fruit fly) 1164 90.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B4GF93_DROPE GL22166 Drosophila persimilis (Fruit fly) 1181 90.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B3P2D5_DROER GG11023 Drosophila erecta (Fruit fly) 1160 90.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B3LZI1_DROAN GF17710 Drosophila ananassae (Fruit fly) 1168 90.00% ORF Names:GSPATT00007737001 EMBL CAK70602.1OrganismParam ecium tetraurelia P100987_P050 B3P666_DROER GG11486 Drosophila erecta (Fruit fly) 805 83.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B4LS28_DROVI GJ20958 Drosophila virilis (Fruit fly) 513 92.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii AT21758p (CG5261, isoform B) (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 Q9VM14_DROME (EC 2.3.1.12) Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly) 512 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii CG5261, isoform A (EC (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 Q7KTK9_DROME 2.3.1.12) Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly) 421 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 Q1WWF8_DROME IP16013p (Fragment) Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly) 224 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B4Q5P6_DROSI GD23472 Drosophila simulans (Fruit fly) 496 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B4NZK7_DROYA GE14551 Drosophila yakuba (Fruit fly) 510 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B4KKB2_DROMO GI23773 Drosophila mojavensis (Fruit fly) 514 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B4HY62_DROSE GM16455 Drosophila sechellia (Fruit fly) 494 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B3N6C8_DROER GG10480 Drosophila erecta (Fruit fly) 494 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B4MZV3_DROWI GK24306 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 507 85.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii Drosophila grimshawi (Fruit fly) (Idiomyia (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B4JQP6_DROGR GH13735 grimshawi) 504 78.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B3MKA8_DROAN GF15860 Drosophila ananassae (Fruit fly) 513 78.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii Drosophila pseudoobscura pseudoobscura (Fruit (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 Q29NY1_DROPS GA18768 fly) 515 78.00% Ordered Locus Names:Ping_2780OrganismP sychromonas ingrahamii (strain 37) ARP41995_P050 B4GJS2_DROPE GL25816 Drosophila persimilis (Fruit fly) 493 78.00% Myod1 ARP32134_P050 Q4V6U8_DROME IP01012p (Nautilus, isoform B) Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly) 328 78.00% Drosophila pseudoobscura pseudoobscura (Fruit Myod1 ARP32134_P050 Q29BN7_DROPS GA10192 fly) 330 78.00% Myod1 ARP32134_P050 B4R236_DROSI GD18361 Drosophila simulans (Fruit fly) 332 78.00% Myod1 ARP32134_P050 B4PNW6_DROYA GE23932 Drosophila yakuba (Fruit fly) 332 78.00% Myod1 ARP32134_P050 B4NG73_DROWI GK22777 Drosophila willistoni (Fruit fly) 337 78.00% Myod1 ARP32134_P050 B4HFX4_DROSE GM23547 Drosophila sechellia (Fruit fly) 332 78.00% Myod1 ARP32134_P050 B4GP81_DROPE GL13832 Drosophila persimilis (Fruit fly) 330 78.00% Myod1 ARP32134_P050 B3P8F3_DROER GG12413 Drosophila erecta (Fruit fly) 332 78.00% Myod1 ARP32134_P050 B3LY60_DROAN GF18746 Drosophila ananassae (Fruit fly) 334 78.00% Myogenic-determination protein (Protein nautilus) Myod1 ARP32134_P050 MYOD_DROME (dMyd) Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly) 332 78.00% Drosophila pseudoobscura pseudoobscura (Fruit arf-1 ARP48184_P050 Q2M0P5_DROPS GA21036
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alan Robert Templeton
    Alan Robert Templeton Charles Rebstock Professor of Biology Professor of Genetics & Biomedical Engineering Department of Biology, Campus Box 1137 Washington University St. Louis, Missouri 63130-4899, USA (phone 314-935-6868; fax 314-935-4432; e-mail [email protected]) EDUCATION A.B. (Zoology) Washington University 1969 M.A. (Statistics) University of Michigan 1972 Ph.D. (Human Genetics) University of Michigan 1972 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 1972-1974. Junior Fellow, Society of Fellows of the University of Michigan. 1974. Visiting Scholar, Department of Genetics, University of Hawaii. 1974-1977. Assistant Professor, Department of Zoology, University of Texas at Austin. 1976. Visiting Assistant Professor, Dept. de Biologia, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil. 1977-1981. Associate Professor, Departments of Biology and Genetics, Washington University. 1981-present. Professor, Departments of Biology and Genetics, Washington University. 1983-1987. Genetics Study Section, NIH (also served as an ad hoc reviewer several times). 1984-1992: 1996-1997. Head, Evolutionary and Population Biology Program, Washington University. 1985. Visiting Professor, Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan. 1986. Distinguished Visiting Scientist, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan. 1986-present. Research Associate of the Missouri Botanical Garden. 1992. Elected Visiting Fellow, Merton College, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 2000. Visiting Professor, Technion Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel 2001-present. Charles Rebstock Professor of Biology 2001-present. Professor of Biomedical Engineering, School of Engineering, Washington University 2002-present. Visiting Professor, Rappaport Institute, Medical School of the Technion, Israel. 2007-2010. Senior Research Associate, The Institute of Evolution, University of Haifa, Israel. 2009-present. Professor, Division of Statistical Genomics, Washington University 2010-present.
    [Show full text]
  • Acoustic Duetting in Drosophila Virilis Relies on the Integration of Auditory and Tactile Signals Kelly M Larue1,2, Jan Clemens1,2, Gordon J Berman3, Mala Murthy1,2*
    RESEARCH ARTICLE elifesciences.org Acoustic duetting in Drosophila virilis relies on the integration of auditory and tactile signals Kelly M LaRue1,2, Jan Clemens1,2, Gordon J Berman3, Mala Murthy1,2* 1Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, United States; 2Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States; 3Lewis Sigler Institute for Integrative Genomics, Princeton University, Princeton, United States Abstract Many animal species, including insects, are capable of acoustic duetting, a complex social behavior in which males and females tightly control the rate and timing of their courtship song syllables relative to each other. The mechanisms underlying duetting remain largely unknown across model systems. Most studies of duetting focus exclusively on acoustic interactions, but the use of multisensory cues should aid in coordinating behavior between individuals. To test this hypothesis, we develop Drosophila virilis as a new model for studies of duetting. By combining sensory manipulations, quantitative behavioral assays, and statistical modeling, we show that virilis females combine precisely timed auditory and tactile cues to drive song production and duetting. Tactile cues delivered to the abdomen and genitalia play the larger role in females, as even headless females continue to coordinate song production with courting males. These data, therefore, reveal a novel, non-acoustic, mechanism for acoustic duetting. Finally, our results indicate that female-duetting circuits are not sexually differentiated, as males can also produce ‘female-like’ duets in a context- dependent manner. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.07277.001 *For correspondence: [email protected] Introduction Competing interests: The Studies of acoustic communication focus on the production of acoustic signals by males and the authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    [Show full text]
  • Another Way of Being Anisogamous in Drosophila Subgenus
    Proc. NatI. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 91, pp. 10399-10402, October 1994 Evolution Another way of being anisogamous in Drosophila subgenus species: Giant sperm, one-to-one gamete ratio, and high zygote provisioning (evoludtion of sex/paternty asune/male-derived contrIbutIon/Drosophia liftorais/Drosopha hydei) CHRISTOPHE BRESSAC*t, ANNE FLEURYl, AND DANIEL LACHAISE* *Laboratoire Populations, Gen6tique et Evolution, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, F-91198 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France; and *Laboratoire de Biologie Cellulaire 4, Unit6 Recherche Associ6e 1134, Universit6 Paris XI, F-91405 Orsay Cedex, France Communicated by Bruce Wallace, July 11, 1994 ABSSTRACT It is generally assume that sexes n animals within-ejaculate short sperm heteromorphism in the Dro- have arisen from a productivity versus provisioning conflict; sophila obscura species group (Sophophora subgenus) to males are those individuals producing gametes n ily giant sperm found solely within the Drosophila subgenus. small, in excess, and individually bereft of all paternity assur- The most extreme pairwise comparison of sperm length ance. A 1- to 2-cm sperm, 5-10 times as long as the male body, between these taxonomic groups represents a factor of might therefore appear an evolutionary paradox. As a matter growth of 300 (12). In all Drosophila species described so far of fact, species ofDrosophila of the Drosophila subgenus differ in this respect, sperm contain a short acrosome, a filiform from those of other subgenera by producing exclusively sperm haploid nucleus, and a flagellum composed of two inactive of that sort. We report counts of such giant costly sperm in mitochondrial derivatives (13, 14) flanking one axoneme Drosophila littondis and Drosophila hydei females, indicating along its overall length: the longer the sperm, the larger the that they are offered in exceedingly small amounts, tending to flagellum and hence the more mitochondrial material.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Mysore
    Biodata of Dr. N. B. RAMACHANDRA Ph.D, FASc PROFESSOR, AND PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Chairman - Department of Studies in Genetics and Genomics Chairman- Board of Studies in Genetics and Genomics Deputy Coordinator for UGC-SAP (CAS-1), DOS in Zoology Director- University of Mysore Genome Centre (Local Secretary - 103rd Indian Science Congress 2016 Former Chairman-Board of Studies in Zoology (UG&PG) & BOS in Clinical Research & Clinical Data Management) University of Mysore, Manasagangotri, Mysuru – 570 006, INDIA [email protected] / [email protected] http://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=CBqZv1oAAAAJ http://www.ramachandralab.com/ Phone: 0821-2419781/888 (O) ; Mobile: 09880033687 1. Date of Birth: 31.05.1958 2. Educational Qualification: 1982-88: Ph.D. in Zoology, Department of Zoology, University of Mysore, INDIA. Thesis title: "Contributions to population cytogenetics of Drosophila: Studies on interracial hybridization and B-chromosomes". 1980-82: M.Sc. in Zoology, 1st Class with 2nd Rank, University of Mysore, Mysore. 1977-80: B.Sc. (Chemistry, Botany, and Zoology), 1st class, Cauvery College, Gonicoppal, University of Mysore, INDIA. 3. Area of Specialization: 1) Drosophila Genetics and Evolution 2) Human Genetic Diseases and Genomics 4. Awards/ Recognitions: Sl.No. Year Recognition Institution “Best boy of the college” Cauvary College, Gonicoppal, Univ. 1 1980 award of Mysore. 2 1982 II Rank in M.Sc DOS in Zoology, Univ. of Mysore. Government of India Nehru Department of Biological sciences, 3 1990 Centenary British Fellowship Warwick University, Coventry, United (common wealth) Award Kingdom (not availed). 1990 - McMaster University, Department of 4. 1992 Post Doctoral Fellow Award Biochemistry, Canada University of California, Department of 1999- Senior Research Associate 5 Cell Molecular and Developmental 2000 II award Biology, Los Angeles, USA VISITING PROFESSOR- to Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Pan-Arthropod Analysis Reveals Somatic Pirnas As an Ancestral TE Defence 2 3 Samuel H
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/185694; this version posted September 7, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 1 Pan-arthropod analysis reveals somatic piRNAs as an ancestral TE defence 2 3 Samuel H. Lewis1,10,11 4 Kaycee A. Quarles2 5 Yujing Yang2 6 Melanie Tanguy1,3 7 Lise Frézal1,3,4 8 Stephen A. Smith5 9 Prashant P. Sharma6 10 Richard Cordaux7 11 Clément Gilbert7,8 12 Isabelle Giraud7 13 David H. Collins9 14 Phillip D. Zamore2* 15 Eric A. Miska1,3* 16 Peter Sarkies10,11* 17 Francis M. Jiggins1* 18 *These authors contributed equally to this work 19 20 Correspondence should be addressed to F.M.J. ([email protected]) or S.H.L. 21 ([email protected]). 22 23 24 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/185694; this version posted September 7, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 25 Abstract 26 In animals, PIWI-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) silence transposable elements (TEs), 27 protecting the germline from genomic instability and mutation. piRNAs have been 28 detected in the soma in a few animals, but these are believed to be specific 29 adaptations of individual species. Here, we report that somatic piRNAs were likely 30 present in the ancestral arthropod more than 500 million years ago. Analysis of 20 31 species across the arthropod phylum suggests that somatic piRNAs targeting TEs 32 and mRNAs are common among arthropods.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Drosophila Buzzatii Transposable Elements Doctoral
    Analysis of Drosophila buzzatii transposable elements Doctoral Thesis Nuria Rius Camps Departament de Genetica` i de Microbiolog`ıa, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra (Barcelona), Spain Memoria` presentada per la Llicenciada en Biologia Nuria Rius Camps per a optar al grau de Doctora en Genetica.` Nuria Rius Camps Bellaterra, a 23 de novembre de 2015 El Doctor Alfredo Ruiz Panadero, Catedratic` del Departament de Genetica` i Microbiologia de la Fac- ultat de Biociencies` de la Universitat Autonoma` de Barcelona, CERTIFICA que Nuria Rius Camps ha dut a terme sota la seva direccio´ el treball de recerca realitzat al Departament de Genetica` i Microbiologia de la Facultat de Biociencies` de la Universitat Autonoma` de Barcelona que ha portat a l’elaboracio´ d’aquesta Tesi Doctoral titulada “Analysis of Drosophila buz- zatii transposable elements”. I perque` consti als efectes oportuns, signa el present certificat a Bellaterra, a 23 de novembre de 2015 Alfredo Ruiz Panadero I tell you all this because it’s worth recognizing that there is no such thing as an overnight success. You will do well to cultivate the resources in yourself that bring you happiness outside of success or failure. The truth is, most of us discover where we are headed when we arrive. At that time, we turn around and say, yes, this is obviously where I was going all along. It’s a good idea to try to enjoy the scenery on the detours, because you’ll probably take a few. (Bill Watterson) CONTENTS Abstract iii Resumen v 1. Introduction 1 1.1. Transposable elements .......................... 1 1.1.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Analysis of Drosophila Virilis Sex Pheromone: Genetic Mapping of the Locus Producing Z-(Ll)-Pentacosene
    Genet. Res., Camb. (1996), 68, pp. 17-21 With 1 text-figure Copyright © 1996 Cambridge University Press 17 Genetic analysis of Drosophila virilis sex pheromone: genetic mapping of the locus producing Z-(ll)-pentacosene MOTOMICHI DOI*, MASATOSHI TOMARU, HIROSHI MATSUBAYASHI1, KIYO YAMANOI AND YUZURU OGUMA Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305, Japan (Received 27 June 1995 and in revised form 18 December 1995) Summary Z-(ll)-pentacosene, Drosophila virilis sex pheromone, is predominant among the female cuticular hydrocarbons and can elicit male courtship behaviours. To evaluate the genetic basis of its production, interspecific crosses between D. novamexicana and genetically marked D. virilis were made and hydrocarbon profiles of their backcross progeny were analysed. The production of Z- (ll)-pentacosene was autosomally controlled and was recessive. Of the six D. virilis chromosomes only the second and the third chromosomes showed significant contributions to sex pheromone production, and acted additively. Analysis of recombinant females indicated that the locus on the second chromosome mapped to the proximity of position 2-218. - and some work on the genetic basis of their control 1. Introduction has been done. Female cuticular hydrocarbons in Drosophila play an In D. simulans, intrastrain hydrocarbon poly- important role in stimulating males and can elicit male morphism is very marked, and two loci that are courtship behaviours, that is, some can act as a sex involved in controlling the hydrocarbon variations pheromone (Antony & Jallon, 1982; Jallon, 1984; have been identified. One is Ngbo, mapped to position Antony et al. 1985; Oguma et al. 1992; Nemoto et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Factors and Drosophila Speciation
    ECOLOGICAL FACTORS AND DROSOPHILA SPECIATION WARREN P. SPENCER, College of Wooster INTRODUCTION In 1927 there appeared H. J. Muller's announcement of the artificial transmutation of the gene. This discovery was received with enthusiasm throughout the scientific world. Ever since the days of Darwin biological alchemists had tried in vain to induce those seemingly rare alterations in genes which were coming to be known as "the building stones of evolution." In the same year Charles Elton published a short book on animal ecology. It was received with little acclaim. That is not sur- prising. To the modern biologist ecology has seemed a bit out-moded, rather beneath the dignity of a laboratory scientist. Without detracting from the importance of Muller's discovery, in the light of the develop- ments of the past 13 years we venture to say that Elton conies nearer to providing the key to the process of evolution than does radiation genetics. Here is a quotation from Elton's chapter on ecology and evolution. '' Many animals periodically undergo rapid increase with practically no checks at all. In fact the struggle for existence sometimes tends to disappear almost entirely. During the expansion in numbers from a minimum, almost every animal survives, or at any rate a very high proportion of them do so, and an immeasurably larger number survives than when the population remains constant. If therefore a heritable variation were to occur in the small nucleus of animals left at a min- imum of numbers, it would spread very quickly and automatically, so that a very large porportion of numbers of individuals would possess it when the species had regained its normal numbers.
    [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]
  • Introduction to the Genomics Education Partnership and Collaborative Genomics Research in Drosophila
    Tested Studies for Laboratory Teaching Proceedings of the Association for Biology Laboratory Education Vol. 34, 135-165, 2013 Introduction to the Genomics Education Partnership and Collaborative Genomics Research in Drosophila Julia A. Emerson1, S. Catherine Silver Key2, Consuelo J. Alvarez3, Stephanie Mel4, Gerard P. McNeil5, Kenneth J. Saville6, Wilson Leung7, Christopher D. Shaffer7 and Sarah C. R. Elgin7 1Amherst College, Department of Biology, P.O. Box 5000, Amherst MA 01002 USA 2North Carolina Central University, Department of Biology, 2246 MTSB, Durham NC 27701 USA 3Longwood University, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, 201 High St., Farmville VA 23909 USA 4University of California San Diego, Division of Biological Sciences, 9500 Gilman Drive 0355, La Jolla CA 92093 USA 5York College/CUNY, Department of Biology, 94-20 Guy R. Brewer Blvd., Jamaica NY 11451 USA 6 Albion College, Biology Department, 611 E. Porter St., Albion MI 49224 USA 7Washington University, Department of Biology, Campus Box 1137, One Brookings Dr., St. Louis MO 3130 USA ([email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]) The GEP, a group of faculty from over 90 primarily undergraduate institutions, is using comparative genomics to engage students in research within regular courses. Using a versatile curriculum, GEP undergraduates undertake projects to improve draft genomic sequences and/or participate in the annotation of these improved sequences. An additional goal of the annotation curriculum is for students to gain a sophisticated understanding of eukaryotic gene structure. Students do so by carefully mapping the protein-coding regions of putative genes from recently- sequenced Drosophila species.
    [Show full text]
  • Early-Stage Evolution of the Neo-Y Chromosome in Drosophila
    Zoological Studies 50(3): 338-349 (2011) Early-Stage Evolution of the Neo-Y Chromosome in Drosophila albomicans Chia-Hao Cheng1, Ching-Ho Chang2, and Hwei-yu Chang1,3,* 1Department of Entomology, National Taiwan Univ., Taipei 106, Taiwan 2Institute of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, National Taiwan Univ., Taipei 106, Taiwan 3Biodiversity Research Center, Academia Sinica, Nankang, Taipei 115, Taiwan (Accepted December 27, 2010) Chia-Hao Cheng, Ching-Ho Chang, and Hwei-yu Chang (2011) Early-stage evolution of the neo-Y chromosome in Drosophila albomicans. Zoological Studies 50(3): 338-349. Numerous theories have specified that an originally autosomal neo-Y chromosome arm is expected to undergo degenerative evolution. Neo- sex chromosomes of Drosophila albomicans originated from 2 Robertsonian translocation events, one for X and the other for Y, between ancestral Drosophila sex chromosomes and a pair of autosomes homologous to the 3rd chromosomes of its sibling species D. nasuta. Since the neo-sex chromosome in D. albomicans is still evolutionarily young, we used genetic approaches to reveal changes in the entire neo-Y chromosome. Non-disjunction is an indicator used to investigate differences between homologous chromosomes. In this study, we first confirmed that no male recombination had occurred in hybrid males of these 2 sibling species. With the aid of molecular marker genotyping and direct karyotyping of aneuploid offspring produced through specially designed crosses and backcrosses of fertile hybrids, we found that the non-disjunction rate was significantly higher in hybrid males with the neo-Y chromosome than in hybrids without it. The high non- disjunction rate made it possible to generate 3,X,X/neo-Y F2 females and X,neo-Y/neo-Y F3 male offspring which can reveal recessive effects of the homozygous 3rd chromosome arm.
    [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]