Ps. Filly, a fifth subgroup inside group contained ORs from all three species, indicating conservation of some OR sequences amongst the 3 xylophagous species. The total lackAndersson et al. BMC Genomics, : biomedcentral.comPage ofFigure Maximumlikelihood dendrogram depending on protein sequences of candidate odorant receptors (ORs) and gustatory receptors (GRs). Incorporated are ORs and GRs from Ips typographus (Ityp), Dendroctonus ponderosae (Dpon), Tribolium castaneum (Tcas) and Megacyllene caryae (Mcar). The branch containing bark beetle GRs was utilised as outgroup to root the tree. The diverse subgroups (numbered based on, and ab) are discussed in the major text. Origilly, TcasOr and TcasOr were discovered inside group and, as indicated here by the numbers in brackets. Numbers at nodes refer to assistance values, which are only displayed when of T. castaneum receptors within group, plus the presence of certain subgroups within the other species, indicate broad expansions of OR lineages in bark beetles and Stibogluconate (sodium) biological activity cerambycids andor losses of corresponding OR lineages in T. castaneum. Expansions of OR lineages had been also observed in T. castaneum. Fortyfive TcasORs formed a largegroup that was exclusive for the flour beetle. Within thiroup, the previously defined coleopteran OR subgroups could possibly be found. These subgroups were collectively rooted by a smaller clade containing receptors from I. typographus and M. caryae. Receptor group contained ORs only from T. castaneum and M. caryae. The lack of bark beetle ORsAndersson et 
al. BMC Genomics, : biomedcentral.comPage ofin thiroup suggested that these OR lineages happen to be lost in bark beetles (or not represented in our transcriptome assemblies), even though retained in cerambycids. Within group, subgroups that were particular for T. castaneum or certain for M. caryae might be located. The dendrogram also contained two groups ( and ) with OR representatives from all four species (though group was domited by expanded T. castaneum lineages). We located the majority of the candidate : orthologous relationships among the bark beetle ORs within groups and (plus a handful of in subgroup a) (e.g. ItypDponOR, ). For these candidate orthologous pairs, amino acid identity was (excluding Oxyresveratrol fragments amino acids, i.e. OR and OR). The Orco orthologues rooted group. The coreceptor Orco was identified inside the antenspecific assembly of D. ponderosae, but surprisingly not inside the antenl transcriptome assembly of I. typographus. Having said that, by utilizing PCR with primers developed from a conserved area close to the Cterminus in the DponOrco, we amplified a amino acid fragment of Orco from I. typographus antenlspecific cD. This ItypOrco fragment shared amino acid identity with DponOrco. As expected, Orco in D. ponderosae shared higher amino acid identity with Orco orthologues in M. PubMed ID:http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/104/3/309 caryae (McarOR, identity) and T. castaneum (TcasOR, identity).Gustatory receptorsreceptors IRa and IRa. Transcripts for DponIRa, DponIRa, DponIRp.Repair, DponIRp DponIRq, and DponIRb probably corresponded to fulllength genes (or incredibly close to), whereas all the other identified IRs had been represented as partial genes. Candidate IR fragments situated on isotigs in D. ponderosae were discarded from our dendrogram alysis, as they have been also short to confidently assign them unigene status. On the other hand, amongst these, two fragments (both amino acids long) shared, and amino acid identity with TcasIRa and TcasIRa, respectively. Hence, in D. ponderosae it appears like orthologues for all conserved antenl IRs identified in T. c.Ps. Filly, a fifth subgroup within group contained ORs from all 3 species, indicating conservation of some OR sequences among the 3 xylophagous species. The complete lackAndersson et al. BMC Genomics, : biomedcentral.comPage ofFigure Maximumlikelihood dendrogram based on protein sequences of candidate odorant receptors (ORs) and gustatory receptors (GRs). Included are ORs and GRs from Ips typographus (Ityp), Dendroctonus ponderosae (Dpon), Tribolium castaneum (Tcas) and Megacyllene caryae (Mcar). The branch containing bark beetle GRs was utilized as outgroup to root the tree. The diverse subgroups (numbered in line with, and ab) are discussed inside the major text. Origilly, TcasOr and TcasOr have been identified within group and, as indicated here by the numbers in brackets. Numbers at nodes refer to support values, which are only displayed when of T. castaneum receptors inside group, along with the presence of distinct subgroups within the other species, indicate broad expansions of OR lineages in bark beetles and cerambycids andor losses of corresponding OR lineages in T. castaneum. Expansions of OR lineages have been also seen in T. castaneum. Fortyfive TcasORs formed a largegroup that was exclusive towards the flour beetle. Inside thiroup, the previously defined coleopteran OR subgroups could be discovered. These subgroups were collectively rooted by a smaller sized clade containing receptors from I. typographus and M. caryae. Receptor group contained ORs only from T. castaneum and M. caryae. The lack of bark beetle ORsAndersson et al. BMC Genomics, : biomedcentral.comPage ofin thiroup suggested that these OR lineages have already been lost in bark beetles (or not represented in our transcriptome assemblies), when retained in cerambycids. Within group, subgroups that had been distinct for T. castaneum or specific for M. caryae could possibly be found. The dendrogram also contained two groups ( and ) with OR representatives from all 4 species (while group was domited by expanded T. castaneum lineages). We discovered many of the candidate : orthologous relationships among the bark beetle ORs within groups and (as well as a few in subgroup a) (e.g. ItypDponOR, ). For these candidate orthologous pairs, amino acid identity was (excluding fragments amino acids, i.e. OR and OR). The Orco orthologues rooted group. The coreceptor Orco was identified within the antenspecific assembly of D. ponderosae, but surprisingly not in the antenl transcriptome assembly of I. typographus. Nonetheless, by utilizing PCR with primers developed from a conserved area close to the Cterminus from the DponOrco, we amplified a amino acid fragment of Orco from I. typographus 
antenlspecific cD. This ItypOrco fragment shared amino acid identity with DponOrco. As expected, Orco in D. ponderosae shared high amino acid identity with Orco orthologues in M. PubMed ID:http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/104/3/309 caryae (McarOR, identity) and T. castaneum (TcasOR, identity).Gustatory receptorsreceptors IRa and IRa. Transcripts for DponIRa, DponIRa, DponIRp.Repair, DponIRp DponIRq, and DponIRb likely corresponded to fulllength genes (or pretty close to), whereas all of the other identified IRs had been represented as partial genes. Candidate IR fragments located on isotigs in D. ponderosae had been discarded from our dendrogram alysis, as they have been also quick to confidently assign them unigene status. Nevertheless, among these, two fragments (both amino acids long) shared, and amino acid identity with TcasIRa and TcasIRa, respectively. Therefore, in D. ponderosae it appears like orthologues for all conserved antenl IRs found in T. c.
