ライフサイエンスコーパス: D. simulans

1 D. simulans and D. mauritiana are both highly polymorphi

2 D. simulans and D. mauritiana Hmr+ partially complement

3 D. simulans appears to be intermediate both in terms of

4 D. simulans is thought to have colonized New World habit

5 D. simulans shows substantial linkage phase structuring

6 D. simulans, together with two additional sister species

7 studied in 50 Drosophila melanogaster and 12 D. simulans lines.

8 mosome that cause hybrid male sterility in a D. simulans background.

9 ila mauritiana that were introgressed into a D. simulans background.

10 na third chromosome were introgressed into a D. simulans genetic background and tested as homozygotes

11 hen the D. melanogaster X is replaced with a D. simulans X.

12 ainst D. simulans males, three QTL affecting D. simulans male traits against which D. mauritiana fema

13 ion in the same genomic region in an African D. simulans population revealed no evidence for a high-f

14 fornia population is not found in an African D. simulans population sample and may be a result of nov

15 crimination of D. mauritiana females against D. simulans males, three QTL affecting D. simulans male

16 lite variability in North and South American D. simulans populations than for an African population.

17 by Hmr and the rescue mutations In(1)AB and D. simulans Lhr.

18 of Drosophila melanogaster (five genes) and D. simulans (four genes) to characterize the homogenizin

19 ibute to ecological isolation between it and D. simulans.

20 in crosses between Drosophila mauritiana and D. simulans was investigated to gain insight into the ev

21 ifferences between Drosophila mauritiana and D. simulans.

22 es in samples of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans (Acp29AB, Acp32CD, Acp33A, Acp36DE, Acp53Ea,

23 otide divergence between D. melanogaster and D. simulans (Jukes-Cantor distance = 0.149 +/- 0.150) wa

24 valley variation between D. melanogaster and D. simulans [5, 6].

25 (Sr-C's) between Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans and between each of these species and D. yak

26 specific crosses between D. melanogaster and D. simulans and compare them with intraspecific control

27 f rescue lines from both D. melanogaster and D. simulans can restore hybrid fitness.

28 amples from wild Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans collected from a variety of natural substrat

29 what could be a natural D. melanogaster and D. simulans core microbiome.

30 adaptive evolution after D. melanogaster and D. simulans diverged and, consequently, is not a speciat

31 The ran-like gene of D. melanogaster and D. simulans has undergone recurrent positive selection.

32 Comparison of the D. melanogaster and D. simulans hsp70 genes reveals whole-family fixed diffe

33 cement fixations between D. melanogaster and D. simulans in the Sr-C's, but tests of polymorphic site

34 crosses between Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans is due to a failure in dosage compensation,

35 uence divergence between D. melanogaster and D. simulans is greater at regulatory sites than expected

36 nonymous polymorphism in D. melanogaster and D. simulans populations.

37 Although D. melanogaster and D. simulans share common allozyme mobility alleles, we f

38 intron sequences between D. melanogaster and D. simulans suggest that D. melanogaster has undergone a

39 the Pgm gene in Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans to investigate the role that protein polymor

40 nt of divergence between D. melanogaster and D. simulans when the pseudogene data are compared to the

41 telomere of the Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans X chromosome at two loci, erect wing (ewg) a

42 ated Drosophila species, D. melanogaster and D. simulans, and show functional cis-regulatory differen

43 f these species, Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans, have previously been described, while this

44 compatibilities separate D. melanogaster and D. simulans, indicating extensive functional divergence

45 d between populations of D. melanogaster and D. simulans, our data appear more consistent with the op

46 ese and other hybrids of D. melanogaster and D. simulans, resulting in an advanced understanding of s

47 coding regions; in both D. melanogaster and D. simulans, same-cluster paralogues are virtually ident

48 since the separation of D. melanogaster and D. simulans, suggesting adaptive evolution.

49 d D. virilis and 27 from D. melanogaster and D. simulans, we show considerable variation between amin

50 ation of such effects in D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

51 ruses are shared between D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

52 a cross between Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.

53 these proteins are from D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

54 ruitfly species, Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.

55 b of the gene ankyrin in D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

56 0-65 MYA), as well as in D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

57 sibling species, Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.

58 as actually two species: D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

59 h its generalist cousins D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

60 osome in hybrids between D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

61 tion on the tip of 3L in D. melanogaster and D. simulans.

62 rocal crosses of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.

63 duced divergence between D. melanogaster and D. simulans; these regions of psiEst-6 could be involved

64 Drosophila sechellia (8 ovarioles/ovary) and D. simulans (15 ovarioles/ovary) identified a major QTL

65 rage, very weak in both D. pseudoobscura and D. simulans (magnitude of NS approximately 1).

66 e in egg production between D. sechellia and D. simulans appears to be a polygenic trait.

67 autosomal region from both D. sechellia and D. simulans, Suppressor of hlx [Su(hlx)].

68 e in egg production between D. sechellia and D. simulans.

69 nd its two sibling species, D. sechellia and D. simulans.

70 Acp's from D. mauritiana, D. sechellia, and D. simulans.

71 sophila (D. melanogaster vs. D. simulans and D. simulans vs. D. sechellia).

72 tional CHCs that differ in abundance between D. simulans and D. sechellia females.

73 he QTL for interspecific differences between D. simulans and D. mauritiana.

74 e that appear to exhibit differences between D. simulans and D. sechellia in their regulation of sex

75 , the two major female CHs differing between D. simulans and D. sechellia.

76 osophila simulans and the divergence between D. simulans and D. melanogaster.

77 o been reported in the hybridization between D. simulans and its closer relative D. sechellia, implyi

78 nsation, caused by incompatibilities between D. simulans dosage compensation proteins and the D. mela

79 with QTL affecting sexual isolation between D. simulans and D. mauritiana and with QTL affecting dif

80 ecifically by D. melanogaster Hmr but not by D. simulans or D. mauritiana Hmr.

81 tim cDNA and corresponds to the one used by D. simulans and D. yakuba.

82 to: (i) species origin of the Y chromosome (D. simulans or D. sechellia); (ii) location of the intro

83 , and this is especially true for the closer D. simulans vs. D. sechellia comparison.

84 hila simulans are introgressed into a common D. simulans genetic background.

85 Two closely related species of Drosophila, D. simulans and D. mauritiana, differ markedly in morpho

86 tive to synonymous substitutions within each D. simulans haplotype.

87 seudoobscura genes and five alleles of eight D. simulans genes.

88 el of DNA sequence variation was typical for D. simulans autosomal genes and showed no departure from

89 or using different genetic backgrounds from D. simulans.

90 zed 56 genes in which polymorphism data from D. simulans are compared with divergence from a referenc

91 Data from D. simulans Cyp6g1 are paralleled in many respects by da

92 a from a single highly inbred line each from D. simulans, D. mauritiana, and D. sechellia.

93 erious and are removed more effectively from D. simulans due to its larger effective population size.

94 anogaster and a 458-bp Lcp psi fragment from D. simulans was also sequenced.

95 Several genes from D. simulans appear to be subject to recent selection on

96 ximately 50% higher than the same genes from D. simulans.

97 hese genomes to variation among genomes from D. simulans suggests that many targets of directional se

98 en shown that a mitochondrial haplotype from D. simulans (simw(501) ) is incompatible with a nuclear

99 lanogaster and a hybrid rescue mutation from D. simulans, I measured the viability of hybrid males th

100 extensive similarity of the R2 ribozyme from D. simulans to that of HDV was a result of convergent ev

101 A comparison was made with sequence from D. simulans.

102 lines of D. melanogaster and sequences from D. simulans and D. yakuba.

103 In D. simulans we observed a significant excess of intermed

104 In D. simulans, analysis of the homologous region reveals u

105 In D. simulans, we find that preferred changes per "site" a

106 In D. simulans, where the novel gene does not exist, the pa

107 detection) of the 52 D. melanogaster ACPs in D. simulans, D. yakuba, and D. pseudoobscura.

108 roach by mapping a dominant marker allele in D. simulans to within 105 kb of its true position using

109 meric heterochromatin of the X chromosome in D. simulans and D. mauritiana, which we call heterochrom

110 ze and sequence of this exon is conserved in D. simulans and putative alternative exons of different

111 Interestingly, the lower TE content in D. simulans compared to D. melanogaster correlates with

112 A-seq to investigate splicing differences in D. simulans, D. sechellia, and three strains of D. melan

113 showed significantly less differentiation in D. simulans than in D. melanogaster.

114 (s), at least some of which have diverged in D. simulans and D. sechellia but not in D. mauritiana.

115 tochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and autosomal DNA in D. simulans.

116 The early death effect in D. simulans attenuated only slightly and was comparable

117 P-elements in D. simulans appear to have been acquired recently from D

118 g evidence for adaptive protein evolution in D. simulans, but not in D. melanogaster.

119 rs contribute to variation for expression in D. simulans with the preponderance of effects being tran

120 , initiation of cellularization is faster in D. simulans by 15 min, 42 s; and initiation of morphogen

121 and initiation of morphogenesis is faster in D. simulans by 18 min, 7 s.

122 of the Winters sex-ratio genes are fixed in D. simulans, and at all loci we find ancestral alleles,

123 ed insertion state at very high frequency in D. simulans.

124 The synonymous site diversity was greater in D. simulans than in D. melanogaster, but the diversity b

125 nd significantly less silent polymorphism in D. simulans on the X chromosome than on 3R, but no diffe

126 expression is accelerated by 13 min, 48 s in D. simulans and retarded by 24 min in D. pseudoobscura.

127 n of hairy is accelerated by 13 min, 48 s in D. simulans.

128 A previous evolutionary EST screen in D. simulans identified partial cDNAs for 57 new candidat

129 Mean heterozygosity at replacement sites in D. simulans was 0.0074 for Acp genes and 0.0013 for a se

130 igher in the D. melanogaster lineage than in D. simulans in 14 genes for which outgroup sequences are

131 sizes are larger in D. melanogaster than in D. simulans in the 34 genes compared between the two spe

132 resent more often in D. melanogaster than in D. simulans.

133 ith the excess of high-frequency variants in D. simulans is inconsistent with the hitchhiking and bac

134 level of infertility when introgressed into D. simulans.

135 ess the bwD allele from D. melanogaster into D. simulans, which lacks the AAGAG on the autosomes.

136 sed from D. mauritiana and D. sechellia into D. simulans and tested for their homozygous effects on h

137 evidence that the P-element has also invaded D. simulans.

138 We successfully mapped D. simulans introgression regions in a small mapping pop

139 males of its sibling species D. mauritiana, D. simulans, and D. sechellia.

140 s generalist sister species D. melanogaster, D. simulans, and D. mauritiana.

141 hree species of Drosophila, D. melanogaster, D. simulans, and D. pseudoobscura.

142 sion levels for 31 genes in D. melanogaster, D. simulans, and their F1 hybrid.

143 om four Drosophila species (D. melanogaster, D. simulans, D. erecta, and D. virilis) and performed co

144 d in the common ancestor of D. melanogaster, D. simulans, D. sechellia, and D. mauritiana, within the

145 ng five Drosophila species: D. melanogaster, D. simulans, D. subobscura, D. mojavensis, and D. virili

146 anogaster subgroup species (D. melanogaster, D. simulans, D. teissieri, D. yakuba, D. erecta, and D.

147 species-restricted genes in D. melanogaster, D. simulans, D. yakuba, D. ananassae, D. pseudoobscura,

148 h male-biased expression on D. melanogaster, D. simulans, D. yakuba, D. ananassae, D. virilis and D.

149 body, and testis in Drosophila melanogaster, D. simulans, and D. yakuba.

150 on level samples of Drosophila melanogaster, D. simulans, and D. yakuba.

151 male adult heads of Drosophila melanogaster, D. simulans, and their F1 hybrids.

152 d in data sets from Drosophila melanogaster, D. simulans, and Zea mays.

153 pecies pairs relative to the D. melanogaster-D. simulans-D. mauritiana-D. sechellia species complex.

154 In certain Drosophila melanogaster-D. simulans hybrids, hybrid male sterility is caused by

155 Sturtevant's description of D. melanogaster/D. simulans hybrid sterility, we have discovered a strai

156 isappointed to find that the D. melanogaster/D. simulans hybridization resulted only in unisexual ste

157 javensis/D. arizonae than in D. melanogaster/D. simulans.

158 We therefore detected no D. simulans chromosome regions causing unconditional hyb

159 distribution of indel variation in Ifc-2h of D. simulans and D. mauritiana revealed a significant seq

160 ing with the heterochromatic Y chromosome of D. simulans, whereas D. simulans OdsH (OdsHsim) does not

161 the variation along the fourth chromosome of D. simulans.

162 melanogaster but on the third chromosome of D. simulans.

163 nated in the common ancestor of the clade of D. simulans, D. mauritiana, and D. sechellia.

164 Hmr were observed in the reciprocal cross of D. simulans females to D. melanogaster males.

165 The reciprocal cross of D. simulans mothers by D. melanogaster males exhibits un

166 s of Drosophila melanogaster and one each of D. simulans and D. sechellia, within two closely linked

167 olving quickly, since the larval exudates of D. simulans, the sister species of D. melanogaster, are

168 referred or unpreferred for several genes of D. simulans and D. melanogaster.

169 ental genomic background (three genotypes of D. simulans).

170 s of Drosophila melanogaster and one line of D. simulans and used a variety of tests to determine whe

171 e P-element is processed in the germ line of D. simulans, and genomic data show an enrichment of P-el

172 s of Drosophila melanogaster and one line of D. simulans.

173 hondrial genomes of three isofemale lines of D. simulans (siI, -II, and -III), two of D. melanogaster

174 11 lines of D. melanogaster and 10 lines of D. simulans found only a single silent polymorphism in t

175 triction survey of an additional 28 lines of D. simulans revealed strong linkage disequilibrium over

176 osomal and X-linked genome that is mostly of D. simulans origin.

177 trains of Drosophila melanogaster and one of D. simulans.

178 segregating mutations in this population of D. simulans.

179 ons of D. melanogaster and one population of D. simulans.

180 mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in populations of D. simulans from Zimbabwe, Malawi, Tanzania, and Kenya.

181 alleles observed in New World populations of D. simulans than seen in a similar survey of D. melanoga

182 These are the first known populations of D. simulans that do not exhibit reduced mtDNA variation.

183 hic history of North American populations of D. simulans.

184 id sterility, we have discovered a strain of D. simulans that produces fertile female hybrids in cros

185 of Drosophila melanogaster, three strains of D. simulans and a total of 78 genes.

186 e compare infected and uninfected strains of D. simulans for (1) sperm production, (2) male fertility

187 r to the one they observed in two strains of D. simulans from Italy, could account for the observed m

188 ymorphism data from 14 loci in 16 strains of D. simulans, finding that the test retains 80% power eve

189 strains of D. melanogaster and 5 strains of D. simulans.

190 ations of Drosophila melanogaster and two of D. simulans.

191 nced on D. ananassae and least pronounced on D. simulans and D. erecta terminal lineages.

192 rid males hemizygous for a D. mauritiana (or D. simulans) X chromosome are viable, the lethality of d

193 D. sechellia, which closely resembled other D. simulans sequences.

194 American populations of D. melanogaster, our D. simulans sample shows a marked reduction in the numbe

195 Overall, D. simulans shows the earliest expression, followed by D

196 are sexually dimorphic between the parental D. simulans and D. mauritiana strains, suggesting that p

197 dely colonized D. melanogaster (and possibly D. simulans) to temperate climates and that natural sele

198 of the D. sechellia X chromosome into a pure D. simulans genetic background and found that males carr

199 Lhr(2) is a rare D. simulans allele that has the ancestral deletion state

200 ween D. melanogaster and the closely related D. simulans.

201 between D. sechellia and its close relative D. simulans show that each of the five major chromosome

202 melanogaster, but not in its close relatives D. simulans and D. yakuba.

203 om 6 of these in the closely related species D. simulans and D. yakuba.

204 of the sequences, or in the sibling species D. simulans and D. mauritiana.

205 sophila melanogaster and its sibling species D. simulans have very different cuticular hydrocarbons,

206 ion on codon usage, while its sister species D. simulans experiences only half the selection pressure

207 ed for genomic regions in the sister species D. simulans that could cause lethality when hemizygous o

208 hism arose in parallel in the sister species D. simulans, by independent mutation with equivalent phe

209 F1 hybrids between it and its sister species D. simulans.

210 cent gene flow between the mainland species (D. simulans) and the two island endemic species (D. maur

211 an allele from one of the parental species (D. simulans) is consistently overexpressed.

212 la simulans clade--the cosmopolitan species, D. simulans, and the two island endemic species, D. maur

213 comparisons of TEs from two related species, D. simulans and D. yakuba.

214 . Sturtevant discovered its sibling species, D. simulans.

215 hybrids when crossed to its sister species, D. simulans, D. sechellia, and D. mauritiana.

216 sechellia and its generalist sister species, D. simulans.

217 Strikingly, D. simulans is also segregating deletions that cause mth

218 Drosophila melanogaster evolves faster than D. simulans at all annotated classes of sites, including

219 We find that D. simulans bwD associates with 2h, which lacks the AAGA

220 ther recent results, these data suggest that D. simulans and D. sechellia are much more closely relat

221 The D. simulans alleles on the left arm of chromosome 3 are

222 The D. simulans Y chromosome also modulated gene expression

223 Drosophila lineages were evident: along the D. simulans lineage we consistently found evidence of ad

224 e divergence between D. melanogaster and the D. simulans clade, indicating that centromere machinery

225 le is consistently overexpressed on both the D. simulans and D. mauritiana backcross genomic backgrou

226 However, the genotypes carrying the D. simulans mtDNA were not consistently short-lived, as

227 such that if either were homozygous for the D. simulans allele, the fly was similar to D. simulans i

228 autosomes is the better explanation for the D. simulans data.

229 s relative to the neutral expectation in the D. simulans sample and some populations of D. melanogast

230 of the Drosophila sechellia genome into the D. simulans genome.

231 Ablation of the D. simulans allele of this gene is sufficient to rescue

232 neously hemizygous for a small region of the D. simulans autosomal genome and hemizygous for the D. m

233 A screen of approximately 70% of the D. simulans autosomal genome reveals 20 hybrid-lethal an

234 w has occurred throughout the genomes of the D. simulans clade species despite considerable geographi

235 A survey of roughly 50% of the D. simulans genome (114 chromosome regions) revealed onl

236 In a region of 5% of the D. simulans genome introgressed into D. melanogaster, we

237 osome during the evolutionary history of the D. simulans lineage.

238 he introgressed D. mauritiana segment on the D. simulans third chromosome, and (iii) grandparental ge

239 F(1) male lethality is suppressed when the D. simulans Lhr(1) hybrid rescue strain is used.

240 Relationships within the D. simulans complex are not addressed.

241 relative to silent mutations than have their D. simulans orthologs.

242 s sequence alignment that includes all three D. simulans clade species as well as the D. melanogaster

243 In this study, we focus on three D. simulans immunity loci, Hmu, Sr-CI/Sr-CIII, and Tehao

244 We found six loci contributing to D. simulans food preference, one of which overlaps a pre

245 cross of Drosophila melanogaster females to D. simulans males typically produces lethal F(1) hybrid

246 e D. simulans allele, the fly was similar to D. simulans in phenotype, with a low level of 7,11-HD.

247 mapping more than 400 previously unassembled D. simulans contigs to linkage groups and by evaluating

248 Using an unusual D. simulans Lhr hybrid rescue allele, Lhr(2), we here id

249 mparisons of Drosophila (D. melanogaster vs. D. simulans and D. simulans vs. D. sechellia).

250 vs. chimpanzees, Drosophila melanogaster vs. D. simulans, and sheep vs. cattle.

251 ellia is sexually dimorphic in CHCs, whereas D. simulans is not.

252 romatic Y chromosome of D. simulans, whereas D. simulans OdsH (OdsHsim) does not.

253 ting D. mauritiana male traits against which D. simulans females discriminate.

254 is also highly conserved in comparison with D. simulans and D. pseudoobscura.

255 aster and use interspecific comparisons with D. simulans, D. pseudoobscura and D.virilis to explore t

256 complete absence of fixed replacements with D. simulans.