Screen for new mutations on the 2nd chromosome involved in indirect flight muscle development in Drosophila melanogaster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An extensive ethylmethanesulfonate mutagenesis of Drosophila melanogaster was undertaken to isolate the stronger alleles of 3 indirect flight-muscle mutations. We isolated 17 strong mutant lines, with nearly complete penetrance and expressivity, using direct screening under polarized light, from more than 1700 mutagenized chromosomes. On complementation, we found 11 of these 17 mutant lines to be alleles of 3 indirect flight-muscle mutations (Ifm(2)RU1, 3 noncomplementing lines; ifm(2)RU2, 6 alleles; ifm(2)RU3, 2 alleles) of the previously isolated 8 complementation groups (Ifm(2)RU1to ifm(2)RU8). In addition, we found 6 new complementation groups with strong defects in adult-muscle morphology; we named these ifm(2)RS1 to ifm(2)RS6. All mutant lines were mapped by meiotic recombination, and 5 of the 6 new complementation lines were mapped using chromosome deficiencies. ifm(2)RS1 maps to a region that harbors ifm(2)RU4 (a mutation that was isolated previously); however, theses are not alleles because each complements the other mutation, and the mutant-muscle phenotype is very different. We used direct screening under polarized light to find recessive mutations; although this method was labor intensive, it can be used to identify recessive genes involved in myogenesis, unlike screens for flightlessness or wing-position defects. This screen identifies regions on the second chromosome that harbor probable genes that are likely expressed in the mesoderm and are thought to be involved in myogenesis. This screen has generated valuable resources that will help us to understand the role of many molecular players involved in myogenesis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".