On 24 Jan 2023, at  14:44 , Deng, Wu-Min wrote:
Dear Steven,
Yes, I also approve changing "poly" to "Elp6". It made more sense to the oocyte polarity defects.  Thanks!
All the best.
Wu-Min
====
On Jan 24, 2023, at  7:03  AM, Margarete Heck wrote:
Dear Steven,
Thank you for your email - and yes I certainly approve of ‘poly' going by Elp6!  Anything to simplify nomenclature!
Hope that helps - Best wishes, Margarete 
====
On 24 Jan 2023, at  11:54 , Steven Marygold wrote:
Dear Margarete Heck and Wu-Min Deng
I am reviewing the FlyBase nomenclature for genes encoding the 6 subunits of the conserved Elongator complex.
The current symbols in FlyBase are:
Elp1
Elp2
Elp3
CG6907 (= Elp4) 
CG2034 (= Elp5) 
poly (= Elp6)
A recent paper by Planelles-Herrero et al 2022 (FBrf0254982) identifies CG6907 as ‘Elp4' and CG2034 ‘Elp5’, and those new symbols will be used in the next FlyBase release.
The same paper refers to ‘poly’ as ‘Elp6’, stating that they experimentally confirmed that poly (CG9829) is the homologue of Elp6 as previously proposed by Bolukbasi et al. (2012).
So, renaming ‘poly’ as ‘Elp6’ would give all six subunits consistent nomenclature within FlyBase and also across species, which I think would be helpful. If we made this change, ‘poly’ would be retained as a searchable and browsable synonym so that researchers would still find the gene if using the ‘poly’ nomenclature.
Since you have both published on the ‘poly’ gene (Klusza and Deng 2010 (FBrf0211064), Bolukbasi et al. 2012 (FBrf0218466)), I wanted to get your opinion on this proposal before implementing it.
Thanks for your time,
Steven