From gm119@XXXX Thu Apr 10  12:02:47  1997
Envelope-to: gm119@XXXX
Delivery-date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997  12:02:47  +0100
To: frasch@XXXX
Subject: FlyBase query
Cc: gm119@XXXX
From: Gillian Millburn (Genetics) <gm119@XXXX>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997  12:06:12  +0100
Content-Length: 1487
Dear Dr. Frasch,
I am curating the paper Cai and Levine, 1997, EMBO J. 16: 1732--1741 for
FlyBase, in which a mod(mdg4) mutation obtained from you is used.
This mutation is called E(var)93D-P142.4D15 in the EMBO paper, and is
described in your paper:
Azpiazu and Frasch, 1993, Genes Dev. 7: 1325--1340, where it is called
P142delta15.
I have a number of questions about this mutation.
1. In the Materials and Methods section of the 1993 paper (top of page
1338, second column) you state that 'delta15 and delta32 also do not
complement the latter mutations' - the 'latter mutations' being in 'an
uncharacterized gene upstream of tin'. I would be grateful if you could
confirm whether this uncharacterized gene is in fact mod(mdg4).
2. Could you also confirm whether delta15, delta32, and the original
P(w+)142 insertion alter the expression of both tinman and the
uncharacterized gene (mod(mdg4)?), or if they just alter expression of one
of the genes ? In addition, what sequences are deleted in the delta15 and
delta32 mutants ?
I look forward to hearing from you,
Gillian Millburn
\--------------------------------------------------------------
Gillian Millburn.
FlyBase (Cambridge),
Department of Genetics,
University of Cambridge,
Downing Street, email: gm119@XXXX
Cambridge, CB2 3EH, Ph : 01223-333963
UK. FAX: 01223-333992
\--------------------------------------------------------------
From frasch@XXXX Tue Apr 15  16:47:57  1997
Envelope-to: gm119@XXXX
Delivery-date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997  16:47:57  +0100
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset='us-ascii'
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997  11:51:54  +0000
To: Gillian Millburn <gm119@XXXX> (Genetics)
From: frasch@XXXX (Manfred Frasch)
Subject: Re: FlyBase query - answers
Content-Length: 1796
>Dear Dr. Frasch,
>
>I am curating the paper Cai and Levine, 1997, EMBO J. 16: 1732--1741 for
>FlyBase, in which a mod(mdg4) mutation obtained from you is used.
>
>This mutation is called E(var)93D-P142.4D15 in the EMBO paper, and is
>described in your paper:
>
>Azpiazu and Frasch, 1993, Genes Dev. 7: 1325--1340, where it is called
>P142delta15.
>
>I have a number of questions about this mutation.
>
>1. In the Materials and Methods section of the 1993 paper (top of page
>1338, second column) you state that 'delta15 and delta32 also do not
>complement the latter mutations' - the 'latter mutations' being in 'an
>uncharacterized gene upstream of tin'. I would be grateful if you could
>confirm whether this uncharacterized gene is in fact mod(mdg4).
It is mod(mdg4), which is also called E(var)3-93D (Dorn et al. 1993)
>
>2. Could you also confirm whether delta15, delta32, and the original
>P(w+)142 insertion alter the expression of both tinman and the
>uncharacterized gene (mod(mdg4)?), or if they just alter expression of one
>of the genes ? In addition, what sequences are deleted in the delta15 and
>delta32 mutants ?
>
P(w+)142 is inserted 27bp upstream of mod(mdg4) (based on the sequence of
the longest (at 5') class of cDNAs obtained). delta 15 deletes from here
into the transcribed region of mod(mdg). delta 32 deletes from here towards
the tin transcription start site, i.e., most of the intergenic region
between mod(mdg) and tin, but doesn't disrupt tin transcription unit - the
breakpoint is ca. 100bp upstream of tin). Neither of the two deletions show
an obvious reduction of tin expression, although they don't complement tin
mutations. The expression of mod(mdg) was not tested.
Please let me know in case you have additional questions.
Sincerely,
Manfred Frasch