Analysis of the Sequence and Phenotype of Drosophila <i>Sex combs reduced</i> Alleles Reveals Potential Functions of Conserved Protein Motifs of the Sex combs reduced Protein
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Drosophila Hox gene, Sex combs reduced (Scr), is required for patterning the larval and adult, labial and prothoracic segments. Fifteen Scr alleles were sequenced and the phenotypes analyzed in detail. Six null alleles were nonsense mutations (Scr(2), Scr(4), Scr(11), Scr(13), Scr(13A), and Scr(16)) and one was an intragenic deletion (Scr(17)). Five hypomorphic alleles were missense mutations (Scr(1), Scr(3), Scr(5), Scr(6), and Scr(8)) and one was a small protein deletion (Scr(15)). Protein sequence changes were found in four of the five highly conserved domains of SCR: the DYTQL motif (Scr(15)), YPWM motif (Scr(3)), Homeodomain (Scr(1)), and C-terminal domain (CTD) (Scr(6)), indicating importance for SCR function. Analysis of the pleiotropy of viable Scr alleles for the formation of pseudotracheae suggests that the DYTQL motif and the CTD mediate a genetic interaction with proboscipedia. One allele Scr(14), a missense allele in the conserved octapeptide, was an antimorphic allele that exhibited three interesting genetic properties. First, Scr(14)/Df had the same phenotype as Scr(+)/Df. Second, the ability of the Scr(14) allele to interact intragenetically with Scr alleles mapped to the first 82 amino acids of SCR, which contains the octapeptide motif. Third, Scr(6), which has two missense changes in the CTD, did not interact genetically with Scr(14).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".