This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ashburner, M. Articles by Bergman, C. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ashburner, M. Articles by Bergman, C. M. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Perspective

Drosophila melanogaster: A case study of a model genomic sequence and its consequences

Department of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3EH, United Kingdom

	ABSTRACT

Top ABSTRACT The genome Immediate lessons Added benefits There is still much... REFERENCES Web site references

 
The sequencing and annotation of the Drosophila melanogaster genome, first published in 2000 through collaboration between Celera Genomics and the Drosophila Genome Projects, has provided a number of important contributions to genome research. By demonstrating the utility of methods such as whole-genome shotgun sequencing and genome annotation by a community "jamboree," the Drosophila genome established the precedents for the current paradigm used by most genome projects. Subsequent releases of the initial genome sequence have been improved by the Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project and annotated by FlyBase, the Drosophila community database, providing one of the highest-quality genome sequences and annotations for any organism. We discuss the impact of the growing number of genome sequences now available in the genus on current Drosophila research, and some of the biological questions that these resources will enable to be solved in the future.

	The genome

Top ABSTRACT The genome Immediate lessons Added benefits There is still much... REFERENCES Web site references

 
Prior to 1998, two groups, the Berkley Drosophila Genome Project and the European Drosophila Genome Project, were beginning to sequence the genome of D. melanogaster by the tried and tested way of sequencing a minimal tiling path of clones (cosmids, P1 clones, and BACs) chosen from physical maps of the genome (Hartl et al. 1992; Madueno et al. 1995; Kimmerly et al. 1996; Hoskins et al. 2000). That changed on May 12, 1998, when Craig Venter invited Gerry Rubin to participate in an attempt to sequence the genome of this fly by whole-genome shotgun sequencing (WGS), a method untried and untested for anything larger than a bacterial genome of one or a few megabases in size. There was considerable skepticism in the community that WGS would succeed for a large and complex genome with much repetitive DNA (see Green's 1997 riposte to Weber and Myers' 1997 paper in this journal). It was a leap of faith that the combination of the new capillary sequencing machines, of very careful construction of clone libraries, and of software (then not yet written) would allow the 120-Mb euchromatic genome of D. melanogaster to be assembled. By September 1999 this faith had been justified: A WGS assembly of the euchromatic portion of the fly genome had been achieved. This proof-of-principle for a metazoan WGS was the first landmark contribution of the fly genome project.

At that time, only one metazoan genome, that of Caenorhabditis elegans, had been sequenced and annotated (The C. elegans Sequencing Consortium 1998). Experience in genome annotation, both as a technical problem and as a community problem, was sparse. The "annotation jamboree," hosted by Celera in November 1999, was important, not only for what it did, but for how it did it—an intimate and intensive collaboration of software engineers and of biologists drawn from the community working together both to build gene models and to annotate these with functional information using the then fledgling Gene Ontology (http://www.geneontology.org/) (Ashburner et al. 2000; Lewis 2005). This is a model that has been followed by many other communities. Also unusual (although not unique, vide C. elegans) to this day was the very close association between the sequencing and annotation groups and FlyBase (http://www.flybase.org/), the community database for Drosophilists. The act of analyzing the fly genome sequence, therefore, was novel in a second respect: It introduced new community methods for genome annotation and curation.

The "complete" sequence of the genome of D. melanogaster we have today is not that released in March 2000 (Adams et al. 2000; Myers et al. 2000; Rubin et al. 2000). Since Release 1, there have been three subsequent genome releases (Celniker et al. 2002) (Release 4 was in April 2004; Release 5 is planned to be the final release of the genome sequence); each release is improved in quality, with the correction of errors, both of sequence and assembly, the closure of physical and sequence gaps (only 23 now remain in the Release 4 euchromatin), and the correct assembly of repetitive sequences (this has been the responsibility of the Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project; http://www.fruitfly.org/). In addition, a separate project, the Drosophila Heterochromatin Genome Project, has been funded to sequence the complex heterochromatic sequences of the telomeres and pericentromeric chromosome regions (http://www.dhgp.org/). FlyBase has been responsible for keeping the annotation of the genome up to date. A major effort by about 10 FlyBase annotators resulted in a complete revision of all gene models and other genome features, based on the first "finished" (Release 3) sequence; this was published in a series of papers in a special issue of Genome Biology in December 2002 (http://www.genomebiology.com/Drosophila). Revision of gene models and other features subsequently is an ongoing, reiterative, task being done by FlyBase (Drysdale et al. 2005).

	Immediate lessons

Top ABSTRACT The genome Immediate lessons Added benefits There is still much... REFERENCES Web site references

 
Before November 1999 there had been decades of debate as to the number of protein-coding genes in D. melanogaster. That debate then stopped: it is 14,000. Some, for example, Hild et al. (2003), have argued that the number of protein-coding genes had been seriously underestimated (perhaps by as many as 2000 protein-coding genes) by the original annotation. A careful experimental evaluation of these "missed" gene models shows few of them to be real; many are simply new exons of genes already known or predicted (see Yandell et al. 2005). Before December 2002, the abundance and diversity of the transposable elements in the genome of D. melanogaster was unknown: The first attempt at their annotation (Kaminker et al. 2002) gave numbers of 1572 elements in 93 families; a more recent analysis using improved methods and including additional families (such as the enigmatic INE-1 element) (Locke et al. 1999), indicates that the Release 4 "euchromatin" (an operational definition for the assembled chromosome arms including the first few megabases of the pericentromeric heterochromatin) has 6013 elements in 127 families (Quesneville et al. 2005; http://dynagen.ijm.jussieu.fr/repet/dmel4/index.html).

	Added benefits

Top ABSTRACT The genome Immediate lessons Added benefits There is still much... REFERENCES Web site references

 
In addition to revealing the parts list of the Drosophila genome, the completed sequence of D. melanogaster has changed the practice of Drosophila genetics and led to many unexpected discoveries. Having the genome has enormously accelerated—by a factor of at least 10—the time required to clone a particular gene of interest; this tedious task is no longer rate limiting or essential for biological discovery. The large, and growing, collection of inserted transposons used for gene disruption (mostly P-elements, but also hobo, Minos, and piggyBac) can now be mapped precisely to the genome sequence, rather than to a 50-100-kb interval by in situ hybridization to polytene chromosomes. About 65% of the genes of D. melanogaster have been disrupted by at least one transposon insertion (Bellen et al. 2004; Thibault et al. 2004; Venken and Bellen 2005). With advances in P-element technology, this has led to methods for the construction of deletions whose limits are known with base-pair accuracy, and to attempts to cover the entire genome with a minimal tiling path of deletions (Parks et al. 2004; Ryder et al. 2004). Single nucleotide polymorphisms between the sequenced strain and others have led to the construction of several SNP maps, which enormously help the mapping of, for example, EMS-induced point mutations (Berger et al. 2001; Hoskins et al. 2001; Martin et al. 2001). The genome sequence has also greatly facilitated the recovery of EMS-induced mutations in selected gene regions using the method of tilling (Winkler et al. 2005).

The completion of the fly genome in 2000 coincided with great advances in genomic technology that have revolutionized our abilities to study transcription, protein binding to specific DNA sequences, and genetic variation at the molecular level. We can now make microarrays for expression profiling, either targeted to all known or predicted coding regions or against wholegenome tiling paths of high resolution (e.g., the INDAC resource; see http://www.indac.net/); we can now map the binding sites of chromatin-associated proteins to the genome at high resolution, using either DamID (Orian et al. 2003; Sun et al. 2003; Bianchi-Frias et al. 2004) or chromatin immunoprecipitation (chIP) (MacAlpine et al. 2004; Birch-Machin et al. 2005); we can now conduct genome-scale surveys for polymorphisms using high-throughput PCR strategies (Glinka et al. 2003; Orengo and Aguade 2004), and effectively re-sequence other genomes of the same species, using tiling paths of oligonucleotides (http://www.dpgp.org/). Genome resources have also revolutionized the genetic studies of complex traits in Drosophila (Pletcher et al. 2002; Harbison et al. 2005).

The task of obtaining one full-length cDNA from each fly gene is not only facilitated by the genomic sequence (Stapleton et al. 2002a,b), it helps enormously in refining gene models (Misra et al. 2002). We can now look forward to the day when each gene is represented by one full-length cDNA (in a versatile vector that will allow it to be shuttled to a variety of useful constructs) (http://www.fruitfly.org/EST/; S. Celniker, pers. comm.), and perhaps even to the availability of full-length cDNAs from every alternatively spliced transcript. Likewise, the genomic sequence has enabled the design of antisense RNA reagents that are now allowing large-scale, systematic RNAi screens for gene function in tissue culture cells (Bettencourt-Dias et al. 2004; Boutros et al. 2004).

The proper study of the genome is the genome itself. Quite unexpected properties of genomes have come from following this edict. Many individual examples of tandemly repeated genes had been known from work prior to the genome. But it was only the analysis of a 2.9-Mb trial sequence (Ashburner et al. 1999) and of the genome itself in 2000 that showed just how common this is, and the extent to which some protein families (e.g., of serine proteases) had expanded by duplication. Similarly, nested genes were first discovered in flies (Henikoff et al. 1986), but these were thought to be rare exceptions: They are not. More than 7% of the genes in the D. melanogaster genome are nested (Ashburner et al. 1999; Misra et. al 2002), and flies have at least a dozen examples of nests within nests. mRNAs that do not encode proteins also appear to be more common than previously thought (Tupy et al. 2005), an observation that may help to explain the phenomenon of "intergenic" transcription (Hild et al. 2003; Stolc et al. 2004).

The analysis of the genome of D. melanogaster has led to the insight that this genome is far more complex than we had imagined. In flies, as in other species (Cohen et al. 2000; Caron et al. 2001; Roy et al. 2002), the sequence has allowed us to observe that the genome is organized into large gene-expression neighborhoods, within which even unrelated genes tend to be coexpressed (Boutanaev et al. 2002; Spellman and Rubin 2002; Parisi et al. 2004; Stolc et al. 2004; Belyakin et al. 2005; Thygesen and Zwinderman 2005). The existence of gene-expression neighborhoods suggests coadapted genomic regions that may be related to chromatin domains that may be preserved as syntenic regions during evolution (see below). The strongest evidence for gene-expression neighborhoods appears to come from genes expressed in the male testis (Boutanaev et al. 2002; Parisi et al. 2004), a genomic organization that may be necessary to facilitate proper gene expression during the final stages of sperm development in a highly condensed chromatin environment. The distribution of intergenic lengths in the compact D. melanogaster genome has also been shown to be nonrandom: Genes with complex regulation have long intergenic regions (Nelson et al. 2004). These observations suggest that relationships between genome structure and gene regulation are encoded in the fly genome sequence.

It is no coincidence that perhaps the greatest recent breakthrough in our understanding of gene regulation has come after the completion of genomic sequences of key eukaryotes like Drosophila: the discovery of the vast array of microRNAs (miRNAs) and their functions. In fact, the genome sequence of D. melanogaster helped reveal the fundamental hairpin structure of premiRNAs from mature miRNA expressed sequences (Lagos-Quintana et al. 2001). In turn, this detailed understanding of miRNA structure has allowed their genome-wide prediction in Drosophila (Lai et al. 2003). The genome sequence has also been critical for the prediction of miRNA targets (Enright et al. 2003; Stark et al. 2003; Rajewsky and Socci 2004; Brennecke et al. 2005; Burgler and Macdonald 2005).

	There is still much to do

Top ABSTRACT The genome Immediate lessons Added benefits There is still much... REFERENCES Web site references

 
We hope not too many scientists will think that all the fun is over with Drosophila, and turn to the study of the Trichoplax or Loxodonta genomes. There remains much to discover, and many resources are now available to catalyze discovery by individual research groups (Matthews et al. 2005), who will remain the bedrock of the Drosophila community in the post-genomic era (Gilbert 1991). Large-scale projects to catalog functional elements in the genome sequence could be integrated and distributed through a Drosophila ENCODE project (http://rana.lbl.gov/drosophila/dencode.html), which would capitalize on the tradition of resource-sharing among Drosophilists, and serve as a model for community-driven, comprehensive genome annotation in higher eukaryotes.

The genomic sequences of a further 11 species of Drosophila (http://species.flybase.net/) will provide a rich source of data for expanding on lessons learned from the D. melanogaster genome. Drosophila genome sequences may, in fact, continue to push advances in WGS and comparative assembly techniques by providing in D. melanogaster a "finished" reference genome. The impact of finishing on genome assembly, annotation, and biological inference can now be evaluated to direct future strategies for genome sequencing projects (Myers et al. 2000; Benos et al. 2001; Celniker et al. 2002).

Heterochromatin has long been recognized as a major, yet mysterious, component of most metazoan genomes. We have already learned much about its molecular nature from studies with Drosophila (Dimitri et al. 2005). We know, for example, that much of the complex heterochromatin of D. melanogaster is composed of a graveyard of decaying, often nested, transposable elements with a sprinkling of protein-coding genes (Hoskins et al. 2002; Dimitri et al. 2003). We know that its chromatin differs in the spectrum of its proteins (Elgin and Grewal 2003). But, it would be an exaggeration for even the most zealous "heterochromatist" to claim that we have anything approaching a full understanding of either the structure or function of this important genome component. The completion of the sequence of D. melanogaster now requires the sequence of the complex heterochromatin (we except the 36 Mb of simple sequence satellite sequences) and new methods for its analysis.

Straightforward in principle, but demanding in practice, is the challenge to discover "functions" for all of the genes. The Gene Ontology has provided not only a structured language to describe gene "function," but also tools for the prediction of gene function. Yet no scientist should be satisfied for long with only predicted function. Of the 14,461 predicted protein-coding genes of D. melanogaster, only 5402 have known mutant alleles; on the other hand, there are 9875 genes in D. melanogaster whose existence is reasonably well attested by classical methods but that have yet to be identified on the sequence (data computed from FlyBase) (A. de Grey, pers. comm.). Linking the wealth of results published in the literature to the genome is absolutely necessary if we are to leverage the depth of our understanding of development, behavior, and evolution in Drosophila using the genome sequences. Continued progress toward completion of the gene disruption projects and expression profiling (see above) will prove essential for finding functions for the remaining as-yet-uncharacterized genes.

Progress, both experimental and computational, in the understanding of regulatory networks in Drosophila is dramatic: Indeed, it can be argued that the regulation of A-P and D-V axes formation in early fly development is one of the best (if not the best) understood complex biological system (http://bdtnp.lbl.gov/). The syncytial embryonic environment is also optimal for the decoding of networks based on transcriptional control. Indeed, these networks can even be emulated in vitro (Isalan et al. 2005). Yet, from experimental analyses, we understand in any detail the structure of the regulatory regions of relatively few genes, and the annotation of even this limited set is regrettably incomplete (http://www.flybase.org/annot/dmel_release4.1.txt). Nevertheless, the ability to reconstruct core features of the Drosophila segmentation network automatically in silico from annotated regulatory sequences (Fig. 1) suggests that a complete genomic inventory of regulatory elements will have direct impact on gene regulatory network analysis in flies. The genomic sequence will enable great advances here, as computational methods for the prediction of regulatory regions (Berman et al. 2002; Ohler et al. 2002; Rajewsky et al. 2002; Ochoa-Espinosa et al. 2005), particularly using comparative data (Bergman et al. 2002; Berman et al. 2004; Grad et al. 2004; Sinha et al. 2004), improve and as the size of the database of functionally characterized cis-regulatory sequences mapped to the genome increases (Lifanov et al. 2003; Bergman et al. 2005). The development of a genome tile microarray in Drosophila will also be essential for experimentally enumerating the targets and binding specificities of the vast majority of the >700 predicted transcription factors in the fly genome, for which no regulatory information is currently available. Integrating results of gene networks inferred from multiple genomic and proteomic (e.g., two-hybrid screens) (Giot et al. 2003; Stanyon et al. 2004; Formstecher et al. 2005) data sources will hopefully expand and link together functional regulatory modules into coherent systems that specify fly biology.

View larger version (43K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Partial gene regulatory network (GRN) for Drosophila melanogaster automatically generated from genome annotations. (A) GRN determined from entire set of protein-DNA interactions in the Drosophila DNase I footprint database (http://www.flyreg.org/) using Cytoscape (Shannon et al. 2003). Note that the majority of currently annotated protein-DNA interactions coalesce into a single interconnected network. (B) Sector of GRN shown in panel A demonstrating that known transcriptional regulatory interactions can be computed directly from text-based annotation of genomic DNA.

One of the great lessons of the post-genomic era is the added value of comparative sequence data for the functional annotation of model systems such as Drosophila. The second genome in the genus, that of Drosophila pseudoobscura, was published in January 2005 (Richards et al. 2005) and represents the first stage in the explosion of comparative genomics data being generated currently in flies (http://rana.lbl.gov/drosophila/multipleflies.html), an inevitability heralded by the D. melanogaster WGS. As with interpreting all biological systems, the D. melanogaster genome must be viewed as the product of evolution; thus, the decoding of functional information in this model genome will be intimately intertwined with knowing the evolutionary history and forces that have produced it. Much, however, remains to be learned about the mechanisms of genome evolution in Drosophila: the relative contributions of gene transposition and inversions to gene movement (Ranz et al. 2003b); the gain of lineage-specific genes by retrotransposition and tandem duplication (Betran et al. 2002; Wang et al. 2004); the divergence and proliferation of transposable elements (Kaminker et al. 2002; Lerat et al. 2003; Sanchez-Gracia et al. 2005); the evolution of cis-regulatory sequences (Emberly et al. 2003; Phinchongsakuldit et al. 2004; Ludwig et al. 2005; Negre et al. 2005; Sinha and Siggia 2005); the relationship between cis-regulatory and transcriptome evolution (Ranz et al. 2003a; Rifkin et al. 2003); and the resolution of the roles that mutation, recombination, genetic drift, population history, and natural selection have jointly played in shaping the genomic landscape we observe today (Andolfatto 2001; Aquadro et al. 2001; Glinka et al. 2003; Orengo and Aguade 2004; Haddrill et al. 2005). By identifying both highly conserved and positively selected sequences to predict and inform function, the integration of evolutionary genomics with classical and forward genetics will continue to propel biological discovery long into the second century of fly research.

	Acknowledgements

 
We thank Brian Oliver, Nipam Patel, Gerry Rubin, and two anonymous reviewers for comments on the manuscript of this review. We thank Hamid Bolouri for showing us the potential of Cytoscape. We apologize for any oversight in attribution resulting from space limitations. C.M.B. is supported by a USA Research Fellowship from the Royal Society. Work in M.A.'s laboratory is supported by an MRC Programme Grant to M.A. and Steve Russell.

	Footnotes

 
Article and publication are at http://www.genome.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/gr.3726705.

² Corresponding author.
E-mail ma11{at}gen.cam.ac.uk; fax 44-1223-333992.

¹ Present address: Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PT, United Kingdom.

	REFERENCES

Top ABSTRACT The genome Immediate lessons Added benefits There is still much... REFERENCES Web site references

 

Adams, M.D., Celniker, S.E., Holt, R.A., Evans, C.A., Gocayne, J.D., Amanatides, P.G., Scherer, S.E., Li, P.W., Hoskins, R.A., Galle, R.F., et al. 2000. The genome sequence of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 287: 2185-2195.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Andolfatto, P. 2001. Adaptive hitchhiking effects on genome variability. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 11: 635-641.[CrossRef][Medline]

Aquadro, C.F., Bauer DuMont, V., and Reed, F.A. 2001. Genome-wide variation in the human and fruitfly: A comparison. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 11: 627-634.[CrossRef][Medline]

Ashburner, M., Misra, S., Roote, J., Lewis, S.E., Blazej, R., Davis, T., Doyle, C., Galle, R., George, R., Harris, N., et al. 1999. An exploration of the sequence of a 2.9-Mb region of the genome of Drosophila melanogaster: The Adh region. Genetics 153: 179-219.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Ashburner, M., Ball, C.A., Blake, J.A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J.M., Davis, A.P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S.S., Eppig, J.T., et al. 2000. Gene Ontology: Tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25: 25-29.[CrossRef][Medline]

Bellen, H.J., Levis, R.W., Liao, G., He, Y., Carlson, J.W., Tsang, G., Evans-Holm, M., Hiesinger, P.R., Schulze, K.L., Rubin, G.M., et al. 2004. The BDGP gene disruption project: Single transposon insertions associated with 40% of Drosophila genes. Genetics 167: 761-781.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Belyakin, S.N., Christophides, G.K., Alekseyenko, A.A., Kriventseva, E.V., Belyaeva, E.S., Nanayev, R.A., Makunin, I.V., Kafatos, F.C., and Zhimulev, I.F. 2005. Genomic analysis of Drosophila chromosome underreplication reveals a link between replication control and transcriptional territories. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 102: 8269-8274.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Benos, P.V., Gatt, M.K., Murphy, L., Harris, D., Barrell, B., Ferraz, C., Vidal, S., Brun, C., Demaille, J., Cadieu, E., et al. 2001. From first base: The sequence of the tip of the X chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster, a comparison of two sequencing strategies. Genome Res. 11: 710-730.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Berger, J., Suzuki, T., Senti, K.A., Stubbs, J., Schaffner, G., and Dickson, B.J. 2001. Genetic mapping with SNP markers in Drosophila. Nat. Genet. 29: 475-481.[CrossRef][Medline]

Bergman, C.M., Pfeiffer, B.D., Rincon-Limas, D.E., Hoskins, R.A., Gnirke, A., Mungall, C.J., Wang, A.M., Kronmiller, B., Pacleb, J., Park, S., et al. 2002. Assessing the impact of comparative genomic sequence data on the functional annotation of the Drosophila genome. Genome Biol. 3: research0086.

Bergman, C.M., Carlson, J.W., and Celniker, S.E. 2005. Drosophila DNase I footprint database: A systematic genome annotation of transcription factor binding sites in the fruitfly, Drosophila melanogaster. Bioinformatics 21: 1747-1749.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Berman, B.P., Nibu, Y., Pfeiffer, B.D., Tomancak, P., Celniker, S.E., Levine, M., Rubin, G.M., and Eisen, M.B. 2002. Exploiting transcription factor binding site clustering to identify cis-regulatory modules involved in pattern formation in the Drosophila genome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99: 757-762.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Berman, B.P., Pfeiffer, B.D., Laverty, T.R., Salzberg, S.L., Rubin, G.M., Eisen, M.B., and Celniker, S.E. 2004. Computational identification of developmental enhancers: Conservation and function of transcription factor binding-site clusters in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genome Biol. 5: R61.[CrossRef][Medline]

Betran, E., Thornton, K., and Long, M. 2002. Retroposed new genes out of the X in Drosophila. Genome Res. 12: 1854-1859.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Bettencourt-Dias, M., Giet, R., Sinka, R., Mazumdar, A., Lock, W.G., Balloux, F., Zafiropoulos, P.J., Yamaguchi, S., Winter, S., Carthew, R.W., et al. 2004. Genome-wide survey of protein kinases required for cell cycle progression. Nature 432: 980-987.[CrossRef][Medline]

Bianchi-Frias, D., Orian, A., Delrow, J.J., Vazquez, J., Rosales-Nieves, A.E., and Parkhurst, S.M. 2004. Hairy transcriptional repression targets and cofactor recruitment in Drosophila. PLoS Biol. 2: E178.[CrossRef][Medline]

Birch-Machin, I., Gao, S., Huen, D., McGirr, R., White, R.A., and Russell, S. 2005. Genomic analysis of heat-shock factor targets in Drosophila. Genome Biol. 6: R63.[CrossRef][Medline]

Boutanaev, A.M., Kalmykova, A.I., Shevelyov, Y.Y., and Nurminsky, D.I. 2002. Large clusters of co-expressed genes in the Drosophila genome. Nature 420: 666-669.[CrossRef][Medline]

Boutros, M., Kiger, A.A., Armknecht, S., Kerr, K., Hild, M., Koch, B., Haas, S.A., Heidelberg Fly Array Consortium, Paro, R., and Perrimon, N. 2004. Genome-wide RNAi analysis of growth and viability in Drosophila cells. Science 303: 832-835.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Brennecke, J., Stark, A., Russell, R.B., and Cohen, S.M. 2005. Principles of microRNA-target recognition. PLoS Biol. 3: e85.[CrossRef][Medline]

Burgler, C. and Macdonald, P.M. 2005. Prediction and verification of microRNA targets by MovingTargets, a highly adaptable prediction method. BMC Genomics 6: 88.[CrossRef][Medline]

Caron, H., van Schaik, B., van der Mee, M., Baas, F., Riggins, G., van Sluis, P., Hermus, M.C., van Asperen, R., Boon, K., Voute, P.A., et al. 2001. The human transcriptome map: Clustering of highly expressed genes in chromosomal domains. Science 291: 1289-1292.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Carson, H.L., Tonzetich, J., and Dopescher, L.T. 1992. Polytene chromosome maps for Hawaiian Drosophila. In Drosophila inversion polymorphism. (eds. C.B. Krimbas and J.R. Powell), pp. 441-453. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

Castle, W.E. 1906. Inbreeding, cross-breeding and sterility in Drosophila. Science 23: 153.[Free Full Text]

The C. elegans Sequencing Consortium. 1998. Genome sequence of the nematode C. elegans: A platform for investigating biology. Science 282: 2012-2018.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Celniker, S.E., Wheeler, D.A., Kronmiller, B., Carlson, J.W., Halpern, A., Patel, S., Adams, M., Champe, M., Dugan, S.P., Frise, E., et al. 2002. Finishing a whole-genome shotgun: Release 3 of the Drosophila melanogaster euchromatic genome sequence. Genome Biol. 3: research0079.

Cohen, B.A., Mitra, R.D., Hughes, J.D., and Church, G.M. 2000. A computational analysis of whole-genome expression data reveals chromosomal domains of gene expression. Nat. Genet. 26: 183-186.[CrossRef][Medline]

Dimitri, P., Junakovic, N., and Arca, B. 2003. Colonization of heterochromatic genes by transposable elements in Drosophila. Mol. Biol. Evol. 20: 503-512.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Dimitri, P., Corradini, N., Rossi, F., and Verni, F. 2005. The paradox of functional heterochromatin. Bioessays 27: 29-41.[CrossRef][Medline]

Drysdale, R.A., Crosby, M.A., Gelbart, W., Campbell, K., Emmert, D., Matthews, B., Russo, S., Schroeder, A., Smutniak, F., Zhang, P., et al. 2005. FlyBase: Genes and gene models. Nucleic Acids Res. 33: D390-D395.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Elgin, S.C. and Grewal, S.I. 2003. Heterochromatin: Silence is golden. Curr. Biol. 13: R895-R898.[CrossRef][Medline]

Emberly, E., Rajewsky, N., and Siggia, E.D. 2003. Conservation of regulatory elements between two species of Drosophila. BMC Bioinformatics 4: 57.[CrossRef][Medline]

Enright, A.J., John, B., Gaul, U., Tuschl, T., Sander, C., and Marks, D.S. 2003. MicroRNA targets in Drosophila. Genome Biol. 5: R1.[CrossRef][Medline]

Formstecher, E., Aresta, S., Collura, V., Hamburger, A., Meil, A., Trehin, A., Reverdy, C., Betin, V., Maire, S., Brun, C., et al. 2005. Protein interaction mapping: A Drosophila case study. Genome Res. 15: 376-384.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Gilbert, W. 1991. Towards a paradigm shift in biology. Nature 349: 99.[CrossRef][Medline]

Giot, L., Bader, J.S., Brouwer, C., Chaudhuri, A., Kuang, B., Li, Y., Hao, Y.L., Ooi, C.E., Godwin, B., Vitols, E., et al. 2003. A protein interaction map of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 302: 1727-1736.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Glinka, S., Ometto, L., Mousset, S., Stephan, W., and De Lorenzo, D. 2003. Demography and natural selection have shaped genetic variation in Drosophila melanogaster: A multi-locus approach. Genetics 165: 1269-1278.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Grad, Y.H., Roth, F.P., Halfon, M.S., and Church, G.M. 2004. Prediction of similarly-acting cis-regulatory modules by subsequence profiling and comparative genomics in D. melanogaster and D. pseudoobscura. Bioinformatics 20: 2738-2750.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Green, P. 1997. Against a whole-genome shotgun. Genome Res. 7: 410-417.[Free Full Text]

Haddrill, P.R., Thornton, K.R., Charlesworth, B., and Andolfatto, P. 2005. Multilocus patterns of nucleotide variability and the demographic and selection history of Drosophila melanogaster populations. Genome Res. 15: 790-799.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Harbison, S.T., Chang, S., Kamdar, K.P., and Mackay, T.F. 2005. Quantitative genomics of starvation stress resistance in Drosophila. Genome Biol. 6: R36.[CrossRef][Medline]

Hartl, D.L., Ajioka, J.W., Cai, H., Lohe, A.R., Lozovskaya, E.R., Smoller, D.A., and Duncan, I.W. 1992. Towards a Drosophila genome map. Trends Genet. 8: 70-75.[Medline]

Henikoff, S., Keene, M.A., Fechtel, K., and Fristrom, J.W. 1986. Gene within a gene: Nested Drosophila genes encode unrelated proteins on opposite DNA strands. Cell 44: 33-42.[CrossRef][Medline]

Hild, M., Beckmann, B., Haas, S.A., Koch, B., Solovyev, V., Busold, C., Fellenberg, K., Boutros, M., Vingron, M., Sauer, F., et al. 2003. An integrated gene annotation and transcriptional profiling approach towards the full gene content of the Drosophila genome. Genome Biol. 5: R3.[CrossRef][Medline]

Hoskins, R.A., Nelson, C.R., Berman, B.P., Laverty, T.R., George, R.A., Ciesiolka, L., Naeemuddin, M., Arenson, A.D., Durbin, J., David, R.G., et al. 2000. A BAC-based physical map of the major autosomes of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 287: 2271-2274.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Hoskins, R.A., Phan, A.C., Naeemuddin, M., Mapa, F.A., Ruddy, D.A., Ryan, J.J., Young, L.M., Wells, T., Kopczynski, C., and Ellis, M.C. 2001. Single nucleotide polymorphism markers for genetic mapping in Drosophila melanogaster. Genome Res. 11: 1100-1113.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Hoskins, R.A., Smith, C.D., Carlson, J.W., Carvalho, A.B., Halpern, A., Kaminker, J.S., Kennedy, C., Mungall, C.J., Sullivan, B.A., Sutton, G.G., et al. 2002. Heterochromatic sequences in a Drosophila whole-genome shotgun assembly. Genome Biol. 3: research0085.

Isalan, M., Lemerle, C., and Serrano, L. 2005. Engineering gene networks to emulate Drosophila embryonic pattern formation. PLoS Biol. 3: e64.[CrossRef][Medline]

Kaminker, J.S., Bergman, C.M., Kronmiller, B., Carlson, J., Svirskas, R., Patel, S., Frise, E., Wheeler, D.A., Lewis, S.E., Rubin, G.M., et al. 2002. The transposable elements of the Drosophila melanogaster euchromatin: A genomics perspective. Genome Biol. 3: research0084.

Kimmerly, W., Stultz, K., Lewis, S., Lewis, K., Lustre, V., Romero, R., Benke, J., Sun, D., Shirley, G., Martin, C., et al. 1996. A P1-based physical map of the Drosophila euchromatic genome. Genome Res. 6: 414-430.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lagos-Quintana, M., Rauhut, R., Lendeckel, W., and Tuschl, T. 2001. Identification of novel genes coding for small expressed RNAs. Science 294: 853-858.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lai, E.C., Tomancak, P., Williams, R.W., and Rubin, G.M. 2003. Computational identification of Drosophila microRNA genes. Genome Biol. 4: R42.[CrossRef][Medline]

Lerat, E., Rizzon, C., and Biemont, C. 2003. Sequence divergence within transposable element families in the Drosophila melanogaster genome. Genome Res. 13: 1889-1896.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lewis, S.E. 2005. Gene Ontology: Looking backwards and forwards. Genome Biol. 6: 103.[CrossRef][Medline]

Lifanov, A.P., Makeev, V.J., Nazina, A.G., and Papatsenko, D.A. 2003. Homotypic regulatory clusters in Drosophila. Genome Res. 13: 579-588.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Locke, J., Howard, L.T., Aippersbach, N., Podemski, L., and Hodgetts, R.B. 1999. The characterization of DINE-1, a short, interspersed repetitive element present on chromosome and in the centric heterochromatin of Drosophila melanogaster. Chromosoma 108: 356-366.[CrossRef][Medline]

Ludwig, M.Z., Palsson, A., Alekseeva, E., Bergman, C.M., Nathan, J., and Kreitman, M. 2005. Functional evolution of a cis-regulatory module. PLoS Biol. 3: e93.[CrossRef][Medline]

MacAlpine, D.M., Rodriguez, H.K., and Bell, S.P. 2004. Coordination of replication and transcription along a Drosophila chromosome. Genes & Dev. 18: 3094-3105.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Madueno, E., Papagiannakis, G., Rimmington, G., Saunders, R.D.C., Savakis, C., Siden-Kiamos, I., Skavdis, G., Spanos, L., Trenear, J., Adam, P., et al. 1995. A physical map of the X chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster: Cosmid contigs and sequence tagged sites. Genetics 139: 1631-1647.[Abstract]

Martin, S.G., Dobi, K.C., and St Johnston, D. 2001. A rapid method to map mutations in Drosophila. Genome Biol. 2: research0036.

Matthews, K.A., Kaufman, T.C., and Gelbart, W.M. 2005. Research resources for Drosophila: The expanding universe. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6: 179-193.[CrossRef][Medline]

Misra, S., Crosby, M.A., Mungall, C.J., Matthews, B.B., Campbell, K.S., Hradecky, P., Huang, Y., Kaminker, J.S., Millburn, G.H., Prochnik, S.E., et al. 2002. Annotation of the Drosophila melanogaster euchromatic genome: A systematic review. Genome Biol. 3: research0083.

Myers, E.W., Sutton, G.G., Delcher, A.L., Dew, I.M., Fasulo, D.P., Flanigan, M.J., Kravitz, S.A., Mobarry, C.M., Reinert, K.H., Remington, K.A., et al. 2000. A whole-genome assembly of Drosophila. Science 287: 2196-2204.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Negre, B., Casillas, S., Suzanne, M., Sanchez-Herrero, E., Akam, M., Nefedov, M., Barbadilla, A., De Jong, P.J., and Ruiz, A. 2005. Conservation of regulatory sequences and gene expression patterns in the disintegrating Drosophila Hox gene complex. Genome Res. 15: 692-700.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Nelson, C.E., Hersh, B.M., and Carroll, S.B. 2004. The regulatory content of intergenic DNA shapes genome architecture. Genome Biol. 5: R25.[CrossRef][Medline]

Ochoa-Espinosa, A., Yucel, G., Kaplan, L., Pare, A., Pura, N., Oberstein, A., Papatsenko, D., and Small, S. 2005. The role of binding site cluster strength in Bicoid-dependent patterning in Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 102: 4960-4965.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Ohler, U., Liao, G.C., Niemann, H., and Rubin, G.M. 2002. Computational analysis of core promoters in the Drosophila genome. Genome Biol. 3: research0087.

Orengo, D.J. and Aguade, M. 2004. Detecting the footprint of positive selection in a European population of Drosophila melanogaster: Multilocus pattern of variation and distance to coding regions. Genetics 167: 1759-1766.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Orian, A., van Steensel, B., Delrow, J., Bussemaker, H.J., Li, L., Sawado, T., Williams, E., Loo, L.W., Cowley, S.M., Yost, C., et al. 2003. Genomic binding by the Drosophila Myc, Max, Mad/Mnt transcription factor network. Genes & Dev. 17: 1101-1114.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Parisi, M., Nuttall, R., Edwards, P., Minor, J., Naiman, D., Lu, J., Doctolero, M., Vainer, M., Chan, C., Malley, J., et al. 2004. A survey of ovary-, testis-, and soma-biased gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster adults. Genome Biol. 5: R40.[CrossRef][Medline]

Parks, A.L., Cook, K.R., Belvin, M., Dompe, N.A., Fawcett, R., Huppert, K., Tan, L.R., Winter, C.G., Bogart, K.P., Deal, J.E., et al. 2004. Systematic generation of high-resolution deletion coverage of the Drosophila melanogaster genome. Nat. Genet. 36: 288-292.[CrossRef][Medline]

Phinchongsakuldit, J., MacArthur, S., and Brookfield, J.F. 2004. Evolution of developmental genes: Molecular microevolution of enhancer sequences at the Ubx locus in Drosophila and its impact on developmental phenotypes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21: 348-363.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Pletcher, S.D., Macdonald, S.J., Marguerie, R., Certa, U., Stearns, S.C., Goldstein, D.B., and Partridge, L. 2002. Genome-wide transcript profiles in aging and calorically restricted Drosophila melanogaster. Curr. Biol. 12: 712-723.[CrossRef][Medline]

Quesneville, H., Bergman, C.M., Andrieu, O., Autard, D., Nouaud, D., Ashburner, M., and Anxolabehere, D. 2005. Combined evidence annotation of transposable elements in genome sequences. PLoS Comp. Biol. 1: 166-165.[CrossRef]

Rajewsky, N. and Socci, N.D. 2004. Computational identification of microRNA targets. Dev. Biol. 267: 529-535.[CrossRef][Medline]

Rajewsky, N., Vergassola, M., Gaul, U., and Siggia, E.D. 2002. Computational detection of genomic cis-regulatory modules applied to body patterning in the early Drosophila embryo. BMC Bioinformatics 3: 30.[CrossRef][Medline]

Ranz, J.M., Casals, F., and Ruiz, A. 2001. How malleable is the eukaryotic genome? Extreme rate of chromosomal rearrangement in the genus Drosophila. Genome Res. 11: 230-239.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Ranz, J.M., Castillo-Davis, C.I., Meiklejohn, C.D., and Hartl, D.L. 2003a. Sex-dependent gene expression and evolution of the Drosophila transcriptome. Science 300: 1742-1745.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Ranz, J.M., Gonzalez, J., Casals, F., and Ruiz, A. 2003b. Low occurrence of gene transposition events during the evolution of the genus Drosophila. Evol. Int. J. Org. Evol. 57: 1325-1335.

Richards, S., Liu, Y., Bettencourt, B.R., Hradecky, P., Letovsky, S., Nielsen, R., Thornton, K., Hubisz, M.J., Chen, R., Meisel, R.P., et al. 2005. Comparative genome sequencing of Drosophila pseudoobscura: Chromosomal, gene, and cis-element evolution. Genome Res. 15: 1-18.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Rifkin, S.A., Kim, J., and White, K.P. 2003. Evolution of gene expression in the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup. Nat. Genet. 33: 138-144.[CrossRef][Medline]

Roy, P.J., Stuart, J.M., Lund, J., and Kim, S.K. 2002. Chromosomal clustering of muscle-expressed genes in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature 418: 975-979.[Medline]

Rubin, G.M., Yandell, M.D., Wortman, J.R., Gabor Miklos, G.L., Nelson, C.R., Hariharan, I.K., Fortini, M.E., Li, P.W., Apweiler, R., Fleischmann, W., et al. 2000. Comparative genomics of the eukaryotes. Science 287: 2204-2215.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Ryder, E., Blows, F., Ashburner, M., Bautista-Llacer, R., Coulson, D., Drummond, J., Webster, J., Gubb, D., Gunton, N., Johnson, G., et al. 2004. The DrosDel collection: A set of P-element insertions for generating custom chromosomal aberrations in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 167: 797-813.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sanchez-Gracia, A., Maside, X., and Charlesworth, B. 2005. High rate of horizontal transfer of transposable elements in Drosophila. Trends Genet. 21: 200-203.[CrossRef][Medline]

Shannon, P., Markiel, A., Ozier, O., Baliga, N.S., Wang, J.T., Ramage, D., Amin, N., Schwikowski, B., and Ideker, T. 2003. Cytoscape: A software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res. 13: 2498-2504.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sinha, S. and Siggia, E.D. 2005. Sequence turnover and tandem repeats in cis-regulatory modules in Drosophila. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22: 874-885.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sinha, S., Schroeder, M.D., Unnerstall, U., Gaul, U., and Siggia, E.D. 2004. Cross-species comparison significantly improves genome-wide prediction of cis-regulatory modules in Drosophila. BMC Bioinformatics 5: 129.[CrossRef][Medline]

Spellman, P.T. and Rubin, G.M. 2002. Evidence for large domains of similarly expressed genes in the Drosophila genome. J. Biol. 1: 5.[CrossRef][Medline]

Stanyon, C.A., Liu, G., Mangiola, B.A., Patel, N., Giot, L., Kuang, B., Zhang, H., Zhong, J., and Finley Jr., R.L. 2004. A Drosophila protein-interaction map centered on cell-cycle regulators. Genome Biol. 5: R96.[CrossRef][Medline]

Stapleton, M., Carlson, J., Brokstein, P., Yu, C., Champe, M., George, R., Guarin, H., Kronmiller, B., Pacleb, J., Park, S., et al. 2002a. A Drosophila full-length cDNA resource. Genome Biol. 3: research0080.

Stapleton, M., Liao, G., Brokstein, P., Hong, L., Carninci, P., Shiraki, T., Hayashizaki, Y., Champe, M., Pacleb, J., Wan, K., et al. 2002b. The Drosophila Gene Collection: Identification of putative full-length cDNAs for 70% of D. melanogaster genes. Genome Res. 12: 1294-1300.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Stark, A., Brennecke, J., Russell, R.B., and Cohen, S.M. 2003. Identification of Drosophila MicroRNA targets. PLoS Biol. 1: E60.[CrossRef][Medline]

Stolc, V., Gauhar, Z., Mason, C., Halasz, G., van Batenburg, M.F., Rifkin, S.A., Hua, S., Herreman, T., Tongprasit, W., Barbano, P.E., et al. 2004. A gene expression map for the euchromatic genome of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 306: 655-660.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sturtevant, A.H. and Dobzhansky, T. 1936. Inversions in the third chromosome of wild races of Drosophila pseudoobscura, and their use in the study of the history of the species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 22: 448-450.[Free Full Text]

Sun, L.V., Chen, L., Greil, F., Negre, N., Li, T.R., Cavalli, G., Zhao, H., Van Steensel, B., and White, K.P. 2003. Protein-DNA interaction mapping using genomic tiling path microarrays in Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 100: 9428-9433.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Thibault, S.T., Singer, M.A., Miyazaki, W.Y., Milash, B., Dompe, N.A., Singh, C.M., Buchholz, R., Demsky, M., Fawcett, R., Francis-Lang, H.L., et al. 2004. A complementary transposon tool kit for Drosophila melanogaster using P and piggyBac. Nat. Genet. 36: 283-287.[CrossRef][Medline]

Thygesen, H.H. and Zwinderman, A.H. 2005. Modelling the correlation between the activities of adjacent genes in Drosophila. BMC Bioinformatics 6: 10.[CrossRef][Medline]

Tupy, J.L., Bailey, A.M., Dailey, D., Evans-Holm, M., Siebel, C.W., Misra, S., Celniker, S.E., and Rubin, G.M. 2005. Identification of putative noncoding polyadenylated transcripts in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 102: 5495-5500.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Venken, K.J. and Bellen, H.J. 2005. Emerging technologies for gene manipulation in Drosophila melanogaster. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6: 167-178.[Medline]

Wang, W., Yu, H., and Long, M. 2004. Duplication-degeneration as a mechanism of gene fission and the origin of new genes in Drosophila species. Nat. Genet. 36: 523-527.[CrossRef][Medline]

Weber, J.L. and Myers, E.W. 1997. Human whole-genome shotgun sequencing. Genome Res. 7: 401-409.[Free Full Text]

Winkler, S., Schwabedissen, A., Backasch, D., Bokel, C., Seidel, C., Bonisch, S., Furthauer, M., Kuhrs, A., Cobreros, L., Brand, M., et al. 2005. Target-selected mutant screen by TILLING in Drosophila. Genome Res. 15: 718-723.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Yandell, M., Bailey, A.M., Misra, S., Shu, S., Wiel, C., Evans-Holm, M., Celniker, S.E., and Rubin, G.M. 2005. A computational and experimental approach to validating annotations and gene predictions in the Drosophila melanogaster genome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 102: 1566-1571.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

	Web site references

Top ABSTRACT The genome Immediate lessons Added benefits There is still much... REFERENCES Web site references

 

http://bdtnp.lbl.gov/; Berkeley Drosophila Transcriptional Network Project.

http://rana.lbl.gov/drosophila/dencode.html; D-encode workshop.

http://rana.lbl.gov/drosophila/multipleflies.html/; Assembly/Annotation/Alignment of 12 Drosophila genomes.

http://species.flybase.net/; Drosophila species genome Web page.

http://www.dhgp.org/; Drosophila Heterochromatin Genome Project.

http://www.dpgp.org/; Drosophila Population Genomics Project.

http://www.flybase.org/; FlyBase.

http://www.flyreg.org/; Drosophila DNase I footprint Database.

http://www.fruitfly.org/; Berkeley Drosophila Genome Project.

http://www.geneontology.org/; Gene Ontology Consortium.

http://www.genomebiology.com/Drosophila/; Release 3 Drosophila genome papers.

http://www.indac.net/; International Drosophila array consortium.

CiteULike

Connotea