4.6 Article

Alternative Splicing of the CpomOR53 Gene Produces Three Transcripts Expressed in Codling Moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) Antennae

Journal

JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY
Volume 112, Issue 2, Pages 991-996

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jee/toy370

Keywords

odorant receptor; alternative splicing; antenna transcript

Categories

Funding

  1. Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission [CP-18-103]
  2. Swedish Research Council FORMAS [2016-01281]
  3. Crafoordska Stiftelsen [20170728]
  4. Formas [2016-01281] Funding Source: Formas

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Incorporation of semiochemicals into codling moth, Cydia pomonella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), IPM programs has drastically reduced the amount of chemical insecticides needed to control this orchard pest. Odorant receptors are key sensors in the detection of semiochemicals and trigger downstream signaling events leading to behavioral responses. For codling moth, 58 odorant receptors have been identified in antennal transcriptomes, a few of which have been characterized for ligand activation. From the codling moth antennal transcriptome, a single transcript encoding CpomOR53 was annotated but re-evaluation suggests two or more variants of this receptor may be present and it is hypothesized that they are produced by alternative splicing. In this study, the complete open reading frame of CpomOR53 was amplified from codling moth male and female antennal RNAs, with three distinct transcripts detected. Characterization of these transcripts indicate that they are produced by alternative splicing of the CpomOR53 gene. The membrane topology for each of the CpomOR53 variants shows that alternative spliced products altered the length of intracellular loop two of the predicted proteins. The effects of these alterations were not determined but will be addressed in future studies determining the ligand(s) that activate each CpomOR53 transcript variant.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available