Comments from curator
No phenotype data: this study was rejected because no phenotype was measured on DGRP lines.All the phenotyping of this
paper (
PMC version; preprint
doi:10.1101/2020.06.18.159731) was done on an
outbred population derived from 113 DGRP lines. The lines, whose
Wolbachia had been cleared in the laboratory beforehand, were combined in 100 pairwise crosses between different lines (details in the supporting information). The offspring were pooled and outbred for 19 non-overlapping generations in population cages, then kept in vials for 5 more generations. The experimental flies were mated females of that fifth vial generation. They are outbred individuals that do not belong to any DGRP line, so their values cannot be stored per DGRP line.
600 singly housed females were kept for life on one of 10 diets differing in protein to carbohydrate ratio (P:C from 1:26 to 2.5:1, made by changing the yeast and sugar content of a modified Lewis medium; Table S1). On day 2 they were either infected by pricking with
Pseudomonas entomophila (OD 0.005), injured with a sterile pin, or only handled (20 females per diet and stress treatment). The authors scored survival daily and counted eggs daily for two weeks, then every second day. They scored gut barrier failure with the "smurf" assay (blue dye in all diets) and climbing every two weeks from week 3 with a negative geotaxis assay (whether the fly climbed 4 cm within 60 s).
The per-fly data and the R analysis script are on Dryad (
doi:10.5061/dryad.80gb5mkq2). They are data of individual outbred females, which cannot be attributed to DGRP lines. The supporting information (one PDF) holds supplementary methods, the diet composition (Table S1), Figures S1-S14 and model summaries (Tables S2-S10) only. There is therefore nothing to upload to DGRPool.
