EMBO/SourceData huggingface dataset:
Figure 6Composite images of representative chimaeric embryos made with control (Mta1Flox/∆Mta2+/+Mta3Flox/Flox) or Mta123∆ ES cells. ES-derived cells express the Kusabira Orange fluorescent marker. Sox2 indicates epiblast cells and Cdx2 is expressed in trophectoderm cells. Arrows indicate examples of K-Orange expressing cells in the mutant embryos. Scale bars = 20µm.(Top) Number of K-Orange expressing cells observed in chimaeric embryos obtained using control ES cells, Mta123∆ ES cells, or Mta123∆ ES cells in which Mta2 was reintroduced on a constitutively expressed transgene (Mta123∆+Mta2TG). P-values calculated using a two-tailed t-test. (Middle) Mean number of K-Orange cells per embryo separated by Sox2 expression. P-values calculated using a two-tailed t-test. (Bottom) Number of K-Orange and Caspase-3 positive cells per embryo. P-values calculated using a one-tailed t-test: *P < 0.05, ****P < 0.0001, "ns" = not significant.
Figure 2RNAPII-RBP-RNA complex was immunoprecipitated by anti-RNAPII antibody or control antibody (cont), and subjected to immunoblotting. The input lanes contained 0.4% of lysates used in the immunoprecipitation experiments.Generation of tRIP-seq libraries of RNAPII-RBP-RNA complexes. After UV crosslinking, protein-RNA complexes were immunoprecipitated with anti-RNAPII (1st IP). RNA of the isolated RNAPII-RBP-RNA complexes was partially digested with RNase on beads, and RBP-RNA complexes dissociated from the bead were further immunoprecipitated with anti-FUS or anti-U1C antibody bound to the other beads (2nd IP). The immunoprecipitated FUS-RNA or U1C-RNA complex was treated with TEX, and then subjected to tRIP-seq library generation. The bottom panels show PCR-amplification of tRIP-seq libraries generated from RNAPII-FUS-RNA complex (left panel) and RNAPII-U1C-RNA complex (right panel).
Figure 4PolyA-seq was performed using N2A cells to examine the effect of downregulation of FUS and U1 snRNP on polyA site usage. Cells were treated with siRNA against Fus (siFus) and/or U1 antisense morpholino (U1AS). Control cells (Cont) were treated with both control siRNA and control antisense morpholino. A. Correlation of changes in polyA site usage between U1-inhibition and Fus-silencing. Fold change in the RPM of a polyA site between siFus and Cont (siFus/Cont) was plotted against that between U1AS and Cont (U1AS/Cont). Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) and the slope of the regression line are shown. B. Correlation of changes in polyA site usage between U1-inhibition alone and the combination of Fus-silencing and U1-inhibition. Fold change in the RPM of a polyA site between siFus+U1AS and Cont (siFus+U1AS/Cont) was plotted against that between U1AS and Cont (U1AS/Cont). Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) and the slope of the regression line are shown. A slope of 1.0 indicates that Fus-silencing has no additive effect on U1-inhibition.
Figure 6Localization of FUS in R495X_N2A cells (R495X), and wild-type N2A cells (WT). Cells were fractionated to separate nucleus and cytoplasm. Equal proportion of cell extracts from nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions were immunoblotted with indicated antibodies.Interactions between FUS and U1 snRNP in the R495X_N2A cells (R495X) and wild-type N2A cells (WT). Total cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-U1-70K antibody or a control antibody (cont), and immunoblotted with indicated antibodies.Effects of the R495X mutation on four categories of polyA sites. Four categories of polyA sites are comprised of (1) FUS-repressed (rep) /U1-repressed sites, (2) FUS-activated (act) /U1-repressed sites, (3) FUS-repressed/U1-activated sites, and (4) FUS-activated/U1-activated sites, according to Fig 4A. Fold change of each polyA site usage by the R495X mutation (R495X/WT) is shown in violin plots. Bars indicate the median and 95% confidential intervals for each category. *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.0001, based on the Steel-Dwass test for comparing all 6 pairs of categories.
Figure 1A. qPCR analysis of Ahr expression in B cell subsets purified from C57Bl/6 mice. Ahr expression was normalized to Hprt1. n = 3-5 independent experiments; mean ± SD.B. qPCR analysis of Ahr expression in splenic CD19+ cells isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured for 4h as indicated. Ahr expression was normalized to Hprt1. Ahr expression among groups was normalized to Medium. n = 4 independent experiments; mean ± SEM; one-way ANOVA, Dunnett's multiple comparison test.C. qPCR analysis of Ahr expression in splenic CD19+ cells isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured for 4h with 20 ng/ml IL-4 and/or 10 μg/ml α-IgM. Ahr expression was normalized to Hprt1. Ahr expression among groups was normalized to Medium. n = 3 independent experiments; mean ± SEM; one-way ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparison test.D. Western blot of protein extracts from splenic CD19+ cells isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured for 4h with 20 ng/ml IL-4 and/or 10 μg/ml α-IgM. Values above the blots indicate AhR protein quantification obtained by densitometry, normalized to β-actin and compared to Medium sample. Sample A and B indicate 2 independent replicates.E. Quantification by densitometric analysis of the results shown in C. n = 2 independent experiments; mean ± range.F. qPCR analysis of Ahr expression in purified splenic B cell subsets isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured as indicated for 4h. Ahr expression was normalized to Hprt1. n = 2 independent experiments; mean ± range.G. qPCR analysis of Ahr expression in splenic CD19+ cells isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured for the indicated time points with 20 ng/ml IL-4 and/or 10 μg/ml α-IgM. Ahr expression was normalized to Hprt1. Ahr expression among groups was normalized to Medium. n = 5 independent experiments; mean ± SEM; one-way ANOVA, Dunnett's multiple comparison test.
Figure 2A. Western blot of nuclear and cytoplasmic protein extracts from splenic CD19+ cells isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured with anti-IgM (α-IgM) for 4h, followed by the indicated treatment for 2h. Values above the blots indicate AhR protein quantification obtained by densitometry, normalized to Sam68 or Tubulin and compared to the DMSO-treated sample. Representative data of n = 3 independent experiments.B. qPCR analysis of Cyp1a1 expression in splenic CD19+ cells isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured for 24h as indicated. Cyp1a1 expression was normalized to Hprt1. Cyp1a1 expression among groups was normalized to Medium DMSO. n = 2 independent experiments; mean ± range.C. Flow cytometry analysis of Cyp1a1 expression, reported by eYFP, in splenic CD19+ cells isolated from Cyp1a1Cre R26R eYFP mice and cultured for 72h as indicated. Representative data of n = 3 independent experiments.D. qPCR analysis of Cyp1a1 expression in purified splenic B cell subsets isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured as indicated for 24h. Cyp1a1 expression was normalized to Hprt1. n = 2 independent experiments; mean ± range.
Figure 3B. Representative flow cytometry analysis of Cyp1a1 expression, reported by eYFP, in CD45.1+ cells harvested from mice challenged as in A. Gating is indicated above the plots. Representative data of n = 3 independent experiments. GC cells: CD95+ GL-7+; non-GC cells: CD95- GL-7-.C, D. Summary of percentage of GC (C) and non-GC eYFP+ (D) cells from flow cytometry analysis. n = 3 independent experiments; lines indicate mean; one-way ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparison test.
Figure 4A. Flow cytometry analysis of CTV dilution in splenic CD19+ cells sorted from non-immune Ahrfl/+mb1Cre+ (Ahr+/- B cells, solid grey) and Ahrfl/-mb1Cre+ (Ahr-/- B cells, black) mice stimulated for 72h as indicated. Treatment of Ahr+/- CD19+ cells with CH223191 is indicated in red. Representative data of n = 4-5 independent experiments.B-D. Flow cytometry analysis of expansion index (B), % of divided cells (C) and replication index (D) of splenic CD19+ cells sorted from non-immune Ahrfl/+mb1Cre+ (black) and Ahrfl/-mb1Cre+ (white) mice stimulated for 72h as indicated. Treatment of Ahr+/- CD19+ cells with CH223191 is indicated in red. n = 4-5 independent experiments; mean ± SEM; 2-way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparison test.E. Flow cytometry analysis of cell cycle distribution of splenic CD19+ cells purified from non-immune Ahrfl/+mb1Cre+ (black) and Ahrfl/-mb1Cre+ (white) mice stimulated for 48h with 5 µg/ml α-IgM. Data representative of n = 2 independent experiments; lines indicate mean; 2-way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparison test.
Figure 5A, B. Flow cytometry analysis of distribution of CD45.1+ and CD45.2+ cells in indicated cell subsets purified from bone marrow (A) and lymph node (B) of sub lethally-irradiated Rag1-/- mice 8 weeks after reconstitution with equal numbers of bone marrow cells from Ahr+/+ (CD45.1+) and Ahr-/- (CD45.2+) mice. Dashed lines indicate 50% level. Representative data of n = 2 independent experiments; two-tailed paired t test.D. Flow cytometry analysis of distribution of CD45.1+CD45.2+ and CD45.2+ cells harvested from host mice challenged as indicated above the dot plots. Representative data of n = 3 independent experiments.E. Flow cytometry analysis of distribution of Ahr+/+ CD45.1+CD45.2+ (black) and Ahr-/- CD45.2+ (white) cells harvested from host mice. Indicated distribution is quantified relative to transferred cells. X symbols indicate SRBC-mock-treated control. Dashed line indicates 50% threshold. Representative data of n = 3 independent experiments; two-tailed paired t test.F, G. Flow cytometry analysis of distribution (F) and cell numbers (G) of IgG1+ and IgG1- HEL3x-binding Ahr+/+ CD45.1+CD45.2+ (black) and Ahr-/- CD45.2+ (white) cells harvested from host mice. Representative data of n = 2 independent experiments; two-tailed paired t test.
Figure 6A, B. Tables showing top 20 down-regulated (A) genes in Ahr-/- B cells as compared to Ahr+/+ cells, after analysis by RNA sequencing. B cells were activated with 10 µg/ml α-IgM + 20 ng/ml IL-4 for 8h; 250 nM FICZ was added to the culture during the last 4h. The average read counts are directly proportional to the extent of expression of a given gene in Ahr+/+ or Ahr-/- cells. Data from n = 3 mice per group. Average read counts for the housekeeping gene Hprt1 in both Ahr+/+ and Ahr-/- B cells are indicated below the table in figure 6A.A, B. Tables showing top up-regulated (B) genes in Ahr-/- B cells as compared to Ahr+/+ cells, after analysis by RNA sequencing. B cells were activated with 10 µg/ml α-IgM + 20 ng/ml IL-4 for 8h; 250 nM FICZ was added to the culture during the last 4h. The average read counts are directly proportional to the extent of expression of a given gene in Ahr+/+ or Ahr-/- cells. Data from n = 3 mice per group. Average read counts for the housekeeping gene Hprt1 in both Ahr+/+ and Ahr-/- B cells are indicated below the table in figure 6A.C. qPCR analysis of Ccno expression in splenic CD19+ cells isolated from non-immune Ahrfl/+mb1Cre+ (Ahr+/- B cells, black) and Ahrfl/-mb1Cre+ (Ahr-/- B cells, white) mice, stimulated with 10 µg/ml anti-IgM for the indicated time points. Ccno expression was normalized to Hprt1. n = 3 independent experiments; mean ± SEM; two-way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparison test.D. qPCR analysis of Ccno expression in splenic CD19+ cells isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured for 8h with 20 ng/ml IL-4 and/or 10 μg/ml α-IgM. Ccno expression was normalized to Hprt1. n = 3 independent experiments; mean ± SEM; one-way ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparison test.E. qPCR analysis of Ccno expression in splenic CD19+ cells isolated from C57Bl/6 mice and cultured for the indicated time points with 20 ng/ml IL-4 and/or 10 μg/ml α-IgM in presence or absence of 250 nM FICZ or 1 μM 3-MC. Ccno expression was normalized to Hprt1. n = 3 independent experiments; mean ± SEM; one-way ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparison test.F. Chromatin Immunoprecipitation (ChIP) analysis of AhR interaction with the Ccno promoter and an irrelevant region (-3.3 Kb from Ccno transcription starting site) in Ahr+/+ (black) and Ahr-/- (white) B cells 5h after activation with 10 µg/ml α-IgM + 20 ng/ml IL-4. 250 nM FICZ was added in the last hour of culture. Representative data of n = 2 independent experiments; mean ± SEM; two-way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparison test.
Figure 1A Tissue distribution of RIPK2 determined by anti-FLAG immunoprecipitation. Organ homogenates from WT (wild-type) and KI (homozygous FLAG-RIPK2) mice were subjected to anti-FLAG immunoprecipitation and immunoblotting.B Inflammatory signaling in wild-type (WT/WT), RIPK2 CRISPR KO (KO/KO) and FLAG-RIPK2 heterozygous (WT/KI) and homozygous (KI/KI) BMDMs. BMDMs were primed with IFNy, stimulated with MDP for indicated times and analysed by immunoblotting.C Cytokine production of RIPK2 CRISPR KO (KO), wild-type (WT) and FLAG-RIPK2 heterozygous (WT/KI) and homozygous (KI/KI) BMDMs in response to MDP. BMDMs were left untreated or treated with IFNy or IFNy and MDP over-night and cytokines were measured by ELISA. N = 5-8 mice. Shown is average ± SEM. ns = P > 0.05; ** = P ≤ 0.01; **** = P ≤ 0.0001; two-way ANOVA.D Serum cytokines in RIPK2 CRISPR KO (KO), wild-type (WT) and FLAG-RIPK2 heterozygous (WT/KI) or homozygous (KI/KI) mice after i.p. MDP administration. Mice were injected i.p. with PBS or MDP, sacrificed after 4h and serum cytokines were measured by ELISA. N = 3-6 mice. Shown is average ± SEM. ns = P > 0.05; ** = P ≤ 0.01; two-way ANOVA.
Figure 2A Two step enrichment to isolate ubiquitinated RIPK2 from BMDMs. Protein lysates from FLAG-RIPK2 BMDMs (A) were sequentially subjected to ubiquitin enrichment (UBA, B) and FLAG pulldown (C) prior to protein elution and subsequent mass spectrometry analysis.
Figure 3A Activation of the NF-κB pathway by RIPK2 Lysine- and phosphosite mutants. RIPK2-deficient THP-1 cells reconstituted with wild-type RIPK2 or RIPK2 mutants were stimulated with L18-MDP, harvested at indicated time points and activation of the NF-κB pathway was analyzed by immunoblotting.B IL-8 production of wild-type THP-1 and RIPK2-deficient THP-1 cells reconstituted with wild-type RIPK2 or RIPK2 mutants and stimulated with L18-MDP was assessed by ELISA. N = 4-8 experiments. Shown is average ± SEM. * = P ≤ 0.05; two-way ANOVA.C) RIPK2 ubiquitination determined by UBA pulldown in RIPK2-deficient cells reconstituted with wild-type or mutant RIPK2 after stimulation with L18-MDP.D) Detection of K63- and M1-linked ubiquitin chains by UBA pulldown or pulldown with ubiquitin chain type-specific antibodies in RIPK2-deficient cells reconstituted with RIPK2 K209R after stimulation with L18-MDP.
Figure 4C Activation of the NF-κB pathway by RIPK2 pocket mutants. RIPK2-deficient THP-1 cells were reconstituted with wild-type RIPK2 or RIPK2 mutants, stimulated with L18-MDP, harvested at indicated time points and analyzed by immunoblotting. ­D IL-8 production of RIPK2-deficient THP-1cells reconstituted with wild-type RIPK2 or RIPK2 mutants and stimulated with L18-MDP was assessed by ELISA. N = 3-8 experiments. Shown is average ± SEM. ns = P > 0.05; * = P ≤ 0.05; *** = P ≤ 0.001; **** = P ≤ 0.0001; two-way ANOVA.E Ubiquitination of RIPK2 pocket mutants. RIPK2-deficient THP-1 cells were reconstituted with wild-type or mutant RIPK2, left unstimulated or stimulated with L18-MDP and subjected to UBA pulldown and immunoblotting.
Figure 5A: Thermal stability assay using selected RIPK2 mutants. THP-1 cells expressing RIPK2 were subjected to heat treatment and the non-denatured fraction was analysed by immunoblotting.B: Binding of RIPK2 to XIAP-BIR2. Lysates from RIPK2-deficient THP-1 cells reconstituted with WT or mutant RIPK2 were subjected to pulldown experiments with recombinantly expressed XIAP-BIR2 and analysed by immunoblotting.
Figure 1(A) Illustration of the crossing and ageing scheme used to obtain total RNA extracts from fly heads for the transcriptional profiling and all successive qPCR assays. Expression of different Atrophin forms with the GMR driver was induced, owing to a temperature‐sensitive mutant Gal80 repressor. F1 flies were allowed to develop at 18°C; at this temperature the Gal80 repressor keeps transgenes silent. Newly eclosed flies (0-48 h) were collected and killed immediately (0d) or aged for 2 or 14 days at 29°C. This inactivates Gal80 and transgenes are switched on by GMR‐Gal4. This protocol allows comparing siblings that differ exclusively in their age and transgenes expression. Control flies crossed to GMR‐Gal4; UbiGal80ts in all experiments are from the w1118 stock in which all UAS transgenes have been generated.(B) Tangential eye sections of flies representative of all the different populations used in the microarray analysis at all different time points. Weak degeneration is only visible after 14 days with polyQ Atro; in particular with Atro75QN there is an initial loss of photoreceptors (PR, arrow), 30.7% of the ommatidia has lost at least 1 PR, that is only 5.1% of all neuronal PR have been lost at this stage (N=333).
Figure 2(A) Heat maps for three subsets of the pattern clustering analysis generated using the Euclidean Distance metric. Upregulated genes are in red and downregulated genes are in green. The downregulating transcriptional activity increases with time. The main branch in clustering of the different Atro mutants is along time points. See also Supplementary Figure 4.
Figure 3(A) qPCR analysis of the fold changes±s.d. of ft transcription. Downregulation starts at 2 days and progresses at 14 days.(B) qPCR analysis of the enrichment±s.d. of different regions of the ft regulatory elements in ChIP for Atro from BG3neuronal cell extracts. Enrichment is calculated as the percentage of DNAimmunoprecipitated from extracts of cells in which Atro expression has been induced, with respect to the amount immunoprecipitated from uninduced cell extracts according to the (Atro-No Ab)induced/(Atro−No Ab)uninduced formula. The DNA region from IV chromosome has been previously shown not to be immunoprecipitated in ChIP for Atro ( Haecker et al, 2007) and has been used as a negative control.(C) Histograms showing the number of ommatidia with a full complement (7) of PR in flies expressing Atro75QN with the Rhodopsin1 driver in either a control (w1118) or different mutant backgrounds and aged at 29°C for 28 days. Heterozygosis for two independent ft alleles and a sav allele significantly enhances the loss of PR. Mild overexpression of Wts via a GMR-wts transgene, which does not display any strong phenotype per se, significantly suppresses the loss of PR. No interaction was detected in this assay with wtsx1 and ykiB5 alleles in heterozygosity. N=430-963 from at least four eyes.(D) Tangential eye sections and histograms showing the degeneration of GMR>Atro75QN, Ubi-Gal80ts flies in combination with different UAS transgenes and aged 14 days as in Figure 1A. UAS-EGFP is used as a negative control. Either Ft or Wts overexpression strongly suppresses loss of PR caused by Atro75QN. Lower panels are provided as examples of quantification. A more modest but still significant rescue is observed by overexpressing a Yki RNAi contruct or Hpo; however, in this case it is to be considered that the overexpression of Hpoper se brings about the loss of at least one PR in ∼5% of ommatidia (data not shown). No effect is detected with overexpression of Sav. Two‐tailed t‐test: *P0.05; **P0.01. The wtsEPG4808 is a previously uncharacterised EP element insertion at the 5′ of the wts gene. Rare homozygous escapers display larger eyes, whereas in combination with GMR-GMR this line gives rise to smaller rough eyes, and, finally, GMR analysis of GMR>wtsEPG4808 indicates a 10‐fold increase in the head content of wts mRNA (data not shown).
Figure 4(A) Tangential eye sections through ftfd clones aged 1, 7 and 14 days, of ftfd,dDGC13 double mutant clones and of ftfd clones in a ykiB5 heterozygous background aged 14 days. Clones are marked by the absence of yellow pigment. Arrows point at degenerating photoreceptors, arrowheads point at intact wt photoreceptors in mosaic ommatidia. The circled ommatidium is genetically wt but non‐autonomously flipped in its polarity and has not degenerated. Lower panels are masks that show clonal borders and quantification of PR number per ommatidia. After 14 days, almost all ftfd cells have degenerated, whereas almost all ftfd,dDGC13 and some ftfd,ykiB5/+ neuronalphotoreceptors have not.(B) Histograms showing the quantification of degeneration in ftfd, ftfddDGC13 and ftfdykiB5/+ clones. Loss of ft leads to statistically significant loss of neurons and this is suppressed at 14 days by ykiB5and much more dramatically by dDGC13. ***P0.001, **P0.01; *P0.05 in two‐tailed t‐test.(C) Degeneration in mosaic ommatidia in ftfd clones. At this stage of degeneration approximately half of the non‐pigmented (genotypically mutant) PR cells display a degenerative phenotype, whereas virtually all pigmented (genotypically wt) PR cells are normal. χ2‐test: 82.38; P0.001. Total PR N=310 (pigmented) and 327 (not pigmented).(D) Tangential eye sections through MARCM clone mutants for ftfd that express either no transgene or an RNAi construct against yki (UAS-ykiIR) with Tub-Gal4 and aged 14 days at 29°C. Because the transgene UAS-ykiIR is on chromosomal arm 2 L, the same as ft, clones generated with this system carry two copies of UAS-ykiIR and therefore downregulate yki very effectively. No other cell outside the clones expresses the construct and is therefore wt for yki. Mask panel is presented on the right of each section. A quantification of photoreceptor numbers (far right) displays a very significant increase in the number of wt ommatidia (N=210 and 219 from four eyes). ***P0.001 in two‐tailed t‐test. If all classes of ommatidia are considered, χ2‐test=232.30; P0.001 for 3 degrees of freedom.
Figure 5(A) Tangential eye sections through wtsX1 mutant fly eyes. In clones for the null wtsX1 allele, degeneration inside the clones is at severe stages at 14 days.(B) Tangential eye sections through sav3 clones. In sav3 after enclosure many photoreceptors are intact but after 14 days at 29°C most sav mutant photoreceptors have degenerated.(C) Histograms showing the quantification of ommatidia with the full complement of photoreceptors in hpo, wts and sav mutant clones. The progression of loss of photoreceptors is evident and statistically significant in all cases. Mutants for hpoBF33 do not survive for 14 days at 29oC and corresponding sections are shown in Supplementary Figure 12. N=195-268. ***P0.001, **P0.01; *P0.05 in two‐tailed t‐test.
Figure 6(A) Regression analysis of the overgrowth versus the neurodegeneration observed in loss of function mutants (left) and overexpression of transgenes (right). Overgrowth quantification is shown in Supplementary Figure 14. For loss of function mutant, the neurodegeneration was quantified at 14 days in clones (as shown in Figures 4 and 5). For UAS‐overexpression transgenes neurodegeneration was quantified at 14 days when expressed with GMRGal4; UbiGal80ts. For CycD+Cdk4, these specific data are missing and have not been plotted; however, Supplementary Figure 13 shows that these mutants do not cause neurodegeneration in a different setup in which they are expressed during both development and adult life. In both cases the regression coefficient r2 is extremely low (0.21 and 0.03), indicating an absence of correlation between the two processes.(B) Tangential eye sections through the eyes of flies expressing with GMR-Gal4, Ubi-Gal80ts either UAS-EGFP or UAS-Yki or UAS-YkiS111A,S168A,S250A and aged 1 or 28 days. Arrows point at missing or degenerated photoreceptors. The UAS-YkiS111A,S168A,S250A is so effective that even the very low expression leaking out with this system is enough to affect development and generate mild eye roughness and overproliferation of lattice cells. Histograms showing the quantification of cell loss in eyes shown in A and also eyes from flies aged at the intermediate 14‐day stage. Mild but significant degeneration is observed for both Yki forms, with respect to the negative control; however, no statistical difference is observed between the two Yki proteins that have dramatically different effects on overgrowth. ***P0.001, **P0.01; *P0.05 in two‐tailed t‐test.