Novel events associated with phenotypic reversion of a <i>P</i> element mutant in <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transposable P elements have been used extensively for Drosophila mutagenesis. While their mutagenic activity has long been recognized, the mechanisms by which P elements cause mutations are varied and not completely understood. We describe here an experiment to replace a P element at vestigial (vg) that caused a strong mutant phenotype (P[21-3]) with a P element (P[21]) known to produce a very weak phenotype when inserted at vg. In addition to testing the feasibility of P element replacements at vg, our investigation led to the production of 7 new vg alleles and 1 apparent second site suppressor. All the vg21-3 revertants that we recovered had a P element inserted into the first exon of vg at the same location and in the same orientation as the original element in vg21-3, providing a unique opportunity to study the mechanism of transposon mutagenesis. A majority of the revertants arose from a previously described event: internal deletion of P sequences, including the P promoter. In addition, 3 novel reversions of the vg21-3 wing phenotype were recovered. The wings of homozygous vg21r36 flies were normal. However, vg21r36 in combination with a deletion of the vg locus exhibited a strong mutant wing phenotype. This was surprising, because the P element insertion in vg21r36 was very similar to that found in the vg21 allele, which showed only slight nicking of the wings in combination with a deletion. In vg21r4, reversion was caused by a tandem insertion of P[21] and the original P[21-3] element present in vg21-3. Finally, the vg21r7 revertant had a P[21-3] insert at vg and 3 additional P elements elsewhere in the genome. We hypothesize that reversion in the 3 novel cases might be caused by P repressor produced by an element at vg or, in the case of vg21r7, elsewhere in the genome. This raises an interesting aspect of P element evolution. While P transposons produce mutations that might prove deleterious to their host, their success in invading the genome of D. melanogaster may be explained by their ability to silence those same mutations by a range of repressor-producing elements.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".