Subject: proposal to change a gene name Dear FlyBase, I am inquiring about the possibility of changing the name of a gene that has already been entered into the FlyBase records. Because our proposal to change the name would necessitate a change of the FlyBase gene entry, we wanted to get FlyBase's opinion on this proposal first. I had assumed that we would simply declare the change in our upcoming paper, and then FlyBase would make the database follow suit subsequent to the publication. Is this correct or do we need to get some form of agreement from FlyBase prior to making such a change in the literature? I honestly don't know what is appropriate and I'm hoping you can fill me in. The gene in question, frodo, has been addressed to date in only one publication (Giansanti et al. Mol. Biol. Cell., 2004; our lab co-aithored this paper) in which the gene's mutant phenotype was briefly reported. The gene has not yet been cloned. That is, it is listed in FlyBase as a broad map position and does not yet correspond to a CG. We (myself and Margaret T. Fuller at Stanford U. School of Medicine, via permission of our collaborator Maurizio Gatti at the U. of Rome) would like to change the name of the gene for the reason that the name FRODO had previously been published in 2002 (Gloy et al, see the abstract below). We have found that a PubMed search for "frodo" pulls up 6 papers on the Dishevelled/Wnt pathways. Unfortunately, since we had been calling the mutant gene "frodo" in our lab since 1998, we and our collaborators failed to change the name prior to our 2004 paper. However, we now feel that the failure to change the name "frodo" would create confusion in the developmental and cell biological literature, and we would like to not be guilty of perpetuating such a source of confusion. We are therefore proposing to re-name the gene ghiberti in our soon-to-be-submitted paper in which we use this mutant. Furthermore, we are pursuing the cloning and further characterization of the ghiberti (frodo) gene and expect to publish this work in the next year or so. Thanks so much for looking into this matter for me. Please let me know if there is another channel that I need to go through to see if our proposal is considered acceptable. -Carmen PS: FYI, Ghiberti was a Italian architect and sculptor who worked with Brunelleschi in the construction of a famous dome in Florence. Since we have used the named brunelleschi for a mutant with a phenotype that is essentially the same as that of the gene currently annotated as "frodo", we thought ghiberti would be a good choice for the new name. Carmen C. Robinett, Ph.D. Dept. of Biological Sciences Stanford University (650) 387-9349 Subject: Re: proposal to change a gene name Dear Carmen, Thank you for getting in touch - you'll see in this reply I have broadened circulation to Maurizio, Rebecca and Maria Grazia. The short answer is that there is no compelling reason not to change the name of this gene to ghiberti, under the circumstances, but it is important that all parties with a stake agree. If anyone has an objection please do speak up promptly. . > We are therefore proposing > to re-name the gene ghiberti in our soon-to-be-submitted paper in > which we use this mutant. ghiberti has not been used as a name for any other gene, so that seems safe. You will need to settle on an abbreviation. ghi is available, and ghib is also available and would work. Please let me know which you prefer, or suggest another possibility which I'll be happy to check for you. The Gloy et al. Nat Cell Biol. paper is not a Drosophila paper, which explains why we don't have a gene called frodo from that paper in FlyBase. As far as we know no-one has yet published a Dsh-pathway-relevent frodo gene in flies though our coverage of the literature is not complete, and it seems only a matter of time before someone does, or uses the frodo name for a gene already named in another way. Based on the existing gene record your frodo (FBgn0083090) a review (Wallingford and Habas, 2005, Development 132(20): 4421--4436) has been assigned to frodo (FBgn0083090). This was our mistake and nicely demonstrates your point about potential confusion! We are checking thoroughly but it seems that paper does not actually discuss a Drosophila gene so will be removed. Unfortunately this cannot happen in time for the next update but will be fixed in the subsequent one. > I had assumed that we would simply declare the change in our > upcoming paper, and then FlyBase would make the database follow suit > subsequent to the publication. During regular literature curation gene name changes are strongly resisted, so it was good that you mailed us specifically. My preference would be to allow this correspondence to reach its natural conclusion, and curate it as a personal communication from you to FlyBase, bringing about the name change in the master files in advance of your paper's publication. This has two advantages. It will make the process leading to the change totally transparent, and it will allow us to capture the charming etymology about the architects. Regards, Rachel for FlyBase. Subject: RE: changing frodo to ghiberti Rachel, I concur with the name change. Rebecca Rebecca Farkas, Ph.D. Office of Science Policy and Planning National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke National Institutes of Health Subject: Re: changing frodo to ghiberti Dear Rachel, Changing the name from frodo to ghiberti is fine with me. Best, Minx Subject: changing frodo to ghiberti (ghi) Hi Rachel, The abbreviation for ghiberti would be ghi. Carmen Subject: RE: changing frodo to ghiberti Dear Rachel, It's ok for me to change the name of frodo to ghiberti Best regards Maria Grazia Giansanti Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: bru paper Dear Carmen, Thanks for the email re: the name change request. Your preference is fine with me. Barbara Subject: Re: bru paper Dear Minx and Carmen, As to the ghiberti/frodo name I do not have strong feelings and you can decide as you like better. In Florence, the Giotto's tower, the Ghiberti's doors and the Brunelleschi's dome belong to same church complex. Since the corresponding genes act in the same process, their designation is logic and nice, and it is OK with me. Ciao, Maurizio Subject: Re: gene name change No problem, change the name. Best wishes Silvia
