Pleiotropy of the <i>Drosophila melanogaster foraging</i> gene on larval feeding-related traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the molecular underpinning of behavioral pleiotropy. The Drosophila melanogaster foraging gene is highly pleiotropic, affecting many independent larval and adult phenotypes. Included in foraging’s multiple phenotypes are larval foraging path length, triglyceride levels, and food intake. foraging has a complex structure with four promoters and 21 transcripts that encode nine protein isoforms of a cGMP dependent protein kinase (PKG). We examined if foraging’s complex molecular structure underlies the behavioral pleiotropy associated with this gene. Using a promotor analysis strategy, we cloned DNA fragments upstream of each of foraging’s transcription start sites and generated four separate forpr-Gal4s. Supporting our hypothesis of modular function, they had discrete, restricted expression patterns throughout the larva. In the CNS, forpr1-Gal4 and forpr4-Gal4 were expressed in neurons while forpr2-Gal4 and forpr3-Gal4 were expressed in glia cells. In the gastric system, forpr1-Gal4 and forpr3-Gal4 were expressed in enteroendocrine cells of the midgut while forpr2-Gal4 was expressed in the stem cells of the midgut. forpr3-Gal4 was expressed in the midgut enterocytes, and midgut and hindgut visceral muscle. forpr4-Gal4’s gastric system expression was restricted to the hindgut. We also found promoter specific expression in the larval fat body, salivary glands, and body muscle. The modularity of foraging’s molecular structure was also apparent in the phenotypic rescues. We rescued larval path length, triglyceride levels (bordered on significance), and food intake of for0 null larvae using different forpr-Gal4s to drive UAS-forcDNA. In a foraging null genetic background, forpr1-Gal4 was the only promoter driven Gal4 to rescue larval path length, forpr3-Gal4 altered triglyceride levels, and forpr4-Gal4 rescued food intake. Our results refine the spatial expression responsible for foraging’s associated phenotypes, as well as the sub-regions of the locus responsible for their expression. foraging’s pleiotropy arises at least in part from the individual contributions of its four promoters.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".