FlyBase Allele Report: Dmel\rho[6]

FB2026_01 , released March 12, 2026

FB2026_01 , released March 12, 2026

Allele: Dmel\rho⁶

General Information

Symbol

Dmel\rho⁶

Species

D. melanogaster

Name

FlyBase ID

FBal0017860

Feature type

allele

Associated gene

Associated Insertion(s)

P{3'lacW}rho⁶

Carried in Construct

Also Known As

rho^del1

Key Links

Allele class

hypomorphic allele - genetic evidence

loss of function allele

amorphic allele - genetic evidence

Mutagen

Delta2-3 transposase

Nature of the Allele

Allele class

amorphic allele - genetic evidence

(Okabe et al., 1996, Sturtevant et al., 1996)

hypomorphic allele - genetic evidence

(Bier et al., 1990)

loss of function allele

(Okabe and Okano, 1997)

Mutagen

Delta2-3 transposase

(Bier et al., 1990)

Progenitor genotype

(Bier et al., 1990)

Associated Insertion(s)

P{3'lacW}rho⁶

Cytology

Description

5.0kb segment has been deleted that includes the Ecol\lacZ of the P{lacW} and 0.5-0.8kb of flanking genomic sequences at the 5' end of the transposase-Ecol\lacZ fusion.

(Bier et al., 1990)

Mutations Mapped to the Genome

Curation Data

Type

Location

Additional Notes

References

Variant Molecular Consequences

Associated Sequence Data

DDBJ / EMBL / GenBank

DNA sequence

Protein sequence

UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot

UniProtKB/TrEMBL

Expression Data

Reporter Expression

Additional Information

Statement

Reference

Marker for

Reflects expression of

Reporter construct used in assay

Human Disease Associations

Disease Ontology (DO) Annotations

Models Based on Experimental Evidence ( 0 )

Disease

Evidence

References

Modifiers Based on Experimental Evidence ( 0 )

Disease

Interaction

References

Comments on Models/Modifiers Based on Experimental Evidence ( 0 )

Disease-implicated variant(s)

Phenotypic Data

Phenotypic Class

lethal - all die during embryonic stage | recessive

(Bier et al., 1990)

some die during embryonic stage | recessive

(Bier et al., 1990)

(Guichard et al., 1999)

Phenotype Manifest In

abdominal 1 lateral pentascolopidial chordotonal organ lch5

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 1 ventral monoscolopidial chordotonal organ vch1

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 2 lateral pentascolopidial chordotonal organ lch5

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 2 ventral monoscolopidial chordotonal organ vch1

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 3 lateral pentascolopidial chordotonal organ lch5

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 3 ventral monoscolopidial chordotonal organ vch1

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 4 lateral pentascolopidial chordotonal organ lch5

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 4 ventral monoscolopidial chordotonal organ vch1

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 5 lateral pentascolopidial chordotonal organ lch5

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 5 ventral monoscolopidial chordotonal organ vch1

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 6 lateral pentascolopidial chordotonal organ lch5

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 6 ventral monoscolopidial chordotonal organ vch1

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 7 lateral pentascolopidial chordotonal organ lch5

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

abdominal 7 ventral monoscolopidial chordotonal organ vch1

(Okabe and Okano, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996)

bract | somatic clone

(del Alamo et al., 2002)

dorsal appendage | maternal effect | somatic clone

(Zartman et al., 2009)

dorsal mesothoracic disc primordium

(Kubota et al., 2000)

embryonic epidermis

(Bier et al., 1990)

embryonic neuroblast

(Yagi et al., 1998)

(Simcox, 1997)

larval RP2 motor neuron

(Yagi et al., 1998)

larval thoracic perisympathetic organ

(Luer et al., 1997)

midline glial cell

(Luer et al., 1997)

(Skeath, 1998)

ventral denticle belt

(Wiellette and McGinnis, 1999)

ventral denticle belt | ventral

(Simcox, 1997)

ventral thoracic disc primordium

(Kubota et al., 2000)

wing vein | germline clone

(Guichard et al., 1999)

wing vein L2 | germline clone

(Guichard et al., 1999)

wing vein L3 | germline clone

(Guichard et al., 1999)

wing vein L4 | germline clone

(Guichard et al., 1999)

Detailed Description

Statement

Reference

The proliferation of rho⁶ mutant clones of adult midgut progenitor cells is normal.

(Jiang and Edgar, 2009)

Virtually all eggs derived from egg chambers containing complete homozygous follicle cell clones appear normal and have two dorsal appendages.

(Lachance et al., 2009)

Only 15% of eggs derived from females with mosaic rho⁶ egg chambers show defects in dorsal appendage size or inter-appendage distance.

(Zartman et al., 2009)

When homozygous somatic clones are made, they proliferate normally, and differentiate bristles but do not differentiate bracts.

(del Alamo et al., 2002)

The number of limb primordial cells is the same as controls in stage 11 embryos, while the number of leg disc cells is reduced in stage 15 embryos. The number of wing disc cells is increased.

(Kubota et al., 2000)

Homozygous mutant clones cause vein-loss phenotypes, sometimes extending a few cells outside the clone boundary. In other cases, vein truncation is rescued within the border of the clone. These reciprocal forms of local cell non-autonomy appear to depend on the shape of the clone, an island of cells tend to take on the vein phenotype associated with the surrounding cells. Homozygous mutant clones on the dorsal side of the wing tended to remove both dorsal and ventral components of the wing vein, however ventral clones generally only affected the ventral components. Homozygous Minute clones revealed that wing veins L1, L2, L3, and L4 are often almost completely eliminated, though for L3, and L4 only the distal halves of the vein are typically affected. The anterior marginal vein L1 is never affected. The overall pattern of vein loss is very similar to S^X155 clones, though clones lacking S^X155 seem to have slightly stronger vein-loss phenotypes extending more proximally than rho⁶.

(Guichard et al., 1999)

Individual denticle rows are not well defined in mutant embryos. Row 5 denticles can be seen in the middle of the mutant denticle belts. Anterior to row 5 is a row consisting of small, stubby denticles, and the most anterior row of denticles contains sparse row 2 denticles. All of the denticles in rho⁶ Ser^RX106 double mutant embryos are similar to each other and resemble a composite of type 5 and 2 denticles. The denticles are disorganised and separate rows are not distinguishable.

(Wiellette and McGinnis, 1999)

Early CNS development shows mild abnormalities in mutant embryos: three neuroblast columns form but there is a weak decrease in the formation of intermediate neuroblasts and their progeny and a weak mis-specification of medial neuroblasts.

(Skeath, 1998)

sna-positive neuroblasts are often missing in homozygous embryos. Loss of RP2 motor neurons is also seen.

(Yagi et al., 1998)

Dorsal medial cell numbers vary between 6 and 10 per embryo.

(Luer et al., 1997)

Homozygous embryos show a loss of 3 chordotonal organs per abdominal hemisegment (VChA and two in LCh5).

(Okabe and Okano, 1997)

rho⁶/rho^7M43 embryos exhibit deletion of the ventral denticles so the width of the belt is reduced. Keilin's organs are missing or defective. Wing, leg, haltere and eye/antenna rho⁶/rho^7M43 mutant discs can be in vivo cultured.

(Simcox, 1997)

Loss of two of five Ch organs at LCh5 and one ventral Ch organ in all abdominal segments. rho⁶ argos²⁵⁷ double mutants exhibit the same phenotype as the rho⁶ single mutant.

(Okabe et al., 1996)

Cuticular phenotype similar to rho^7M43.

(Bier et al., 1990)

strong allele embryonic lethal

External Data

Interactions

Show genetic interaction network for Enhancers & Suppressors

Phenotypic Class

Phenotype Manifest In

NOT suppressed by

Statement

Reference

rho⁶ has phenotype, non-suppressible by Scer\GAL4^Bx-MS1096/S^UAS.cGb

(Guichard et al., 1999)

NOT Suppressor of

Statement

Reference

rho⁶ is a non-suppressor of dorsal appendage phenotype of cic^fet-U6/cic^fet-T6

(Atkey et al., 2006)

rho⁶ is a non-suppressor of egg phenotype of cic^fet-U6/cic^fet-T6

(Atkey et al., 2006)

Additional Comments

Genetic Interactions

Statement

Reference

rho⁶ mutant clones have no effect on the ectopic appendage-producing fates in cic^fet-U6/cic^fet-T6 mutant egg chambers, indicating that loss of rho function cannot suppress the cic phenotype.

(Atkey et al., 2006)

The disc phenotype of tkv⁸ ; rho⁶ double mutant embryos is a simple addition of each single mutant phenotype, in which wing discs are lost completely and leg discs are severely reduced.

(Kubota et al., 2000)

Expression of S^Scer\UAS.cGb directed by Scer\GAL4^Bx-MS1096 in homozygous rho⁶ clones does not suppress the rho⁶ phenotype.

(Guichard et al., 1999)

Xenogenetic Interactions

Statement

Reference

Complementation and Rescue Data

Fails to complement

(Zartman et al., 2009)

(Bier et al., 1990)

Comments

Images (0)

Mutant

Wild-type

Stocks (0)

Notes on Origin

Discoverer

Bier.

Comments

Comments

No interaction with P{sev-svp1} or P{sev-svp2} exists.

(Begemann et al., 1995)

External Crossreferences and Linkouts ( 0 )

Synonyms and Secondary IDs (8)

Reported As

Symbol Synonym

rho-1^del1

(Wasserman et al., 2000)

rho1^de11

(del Alamo et al., 2002)

rho⁶

(Lachance et al., 2009)

rho^del1

(Kondo and Hayashi, 2019, Ogura et al., 2018, Kondo and Hayashi, 2013, Jiang and Edgar, 2009, Zartman et al., 2009, Alvarez et al., 2003, Guichard et al., 1999, Wiellette and McGinnis, 1999, Spencer et al., 1998, Yagi et al., 1998, Luer et al., 1997, Okabe and Okano, 1997, Simcox, 1997, Yagi and Hayashi, 1997, Okabe et al., 1996, Sturtevant et al., 1996, Bier et al., 1990)

rho^rev37

(Begemann et al., 1995)

rhomboid^del-1

(Skeath, 1998)

ve⁶

Name Synonyms

rhomboid6

(Atkey et al., 2006)

Secondary FlyBase IDs

References (24)

Report Sections