Subject: Splitting the l(1)G0060 entry
Hi--
There is a problem with the l(1)G0060 gene (http://flybase.net/reports/FBgn0027321.html) and its associated alleles. 
In http://flybase.net/reports/FBrf0125111.html, we described a screen for duplications of region 10C to 11D. The Dp(1;Y) chromosomes all shared the same 11D3-8 proximal breakpoint, but extended different distances distally. Eight of the 10 duplications rescued the lethality of the P{lacW}l(1)G0060G0060 chromosome. The smallest duplication rescuing the lethal phenotype had the breakpoints 11C3-4;11D3-8. This demonstrates that no lethals exist on the X chromosome outside the 11C3-4;11D3-8 region. 
The P{lacW}l(1)G0060G0060 insertion was originally mapped to 11B14-C2 by in situ hybridization. The flanking sequence maps to 5B6. This discrepancy was noted in http://flybase.net/reports/FBrf0173177.html, but our duplication data was not taken into consideration in associating the l(1)G0060 name with CG3125, the gene at the 5B6 insertion site. 
It seems likely that there are two P{lacW} insertions on the G0060 chromosome. The P{lacW}l(1)G0060G0060 name should be associated with the 11B14-C2 locus even though there is no sequence information for it. The insertion in CG3125 should be renamed P{lacW}CG3125G0060 and the gene should be renamed from l(1)G0060 to CG3125. 
In addition, the following comment should be removed from the CG3125 entry:
"There is a discrepancy between the in situ localisation (11B1) and the molecular localisation based on the flanking sequence (5B2--5B5) for the "l(1)G0060" (l(1)G0060G0060) line. The available data suggests that it is most likely that the molecular localisation (5B2--5B5) is correct and that the in situs were misinterpreted."
Thanks!
Kevin