QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

Help viewing high resolution images Return to article

Fig. 7. Egfr acts antagonistically to Ed in bristle patterning, but it does not affect the levels of N signaling in proneural clusters. (A-D) Nota of flies expressing in proneural clusters (sca-Gal4 driver) either UAS-Egfr (A), UAS-Egfr plus UAS-ed^ECD (B), UAS-raf^gof (C), or UAS-raf^gof plus UAS-ed^ECD (D). There is a strongly enhanced tufting effect caused by co-expression in B and D. (E,F) Nota of ap-Gal4;UAS-Egfr^DN (E) and ed^1x5/ed^slH8 ap-Gal4;UAS-Egfr^DN (F) flies. The ectopic bristle phenotype of ed^1x5/ed^slH8 mutant flies is partially suppressed by the simultaneous decrease of Egfr function (compare with Fig. 1B). Arrow and arrowhead in F indicates the positions where ADC and PPA bristles are respectively eliminated. (G-I) Accumulation of E(spl)-m8 mRNA in the notum region of a wild-type disc (G) and in discs overexpressing either UAS-ras1^V12 (H) or UAS-aos (I) in proneural clusters (C253-Gal4 driver). No significant differences were observed by comparing discs of similar stages from a total of 22 wild-type, 19 UAS-ras1^V12 and 16 UAS-aos discs examined.

Return to article