Studentification guide for North America: delivering harmonious town and gown associations

Studentification guide for North America: delivering harmonious town and gown association

Additional file 3: of Development of a community health inclusion index: an evaluation tool for improving inclusion of people with disabilities in community health initiatives

Expert Panel Results.xlsx: A database of the items kept and removed by the Expert Panel as part of the development of the CHII. (XLSX 25 kb

All Quality Controlled Data

All carbonate chemistry, nutrient chemistry, and temperature data from the two 24 hour sampling periods

Additional file 6: Figure S6. of The Toll pathway underlies host sexual dimorphism in resistance to both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria in mated Drosophila

Sexual dimorphism of the Toll pathway. (A) Survival of male and female with downregulation of modSP (da-Gal4 > modSP-RNAi), of psh (da-Gal4 > psh-RNAi) or of wildtype (da-Gal4 > Canton S). We confirmed via RNA interference that psh but not modSP was responsible for the sexual dimorphism in survival upon P. rettgeri infection (Cox-ph: Line (psh vs. Canton S): df = 1, χ2 = 0.22, P = 0.63, Sex: df = 1, χ2 = 13.97, P = 0.0002, Line*Sex: df = 1, χ2 = 0.73, P = 0.4; Cox-ph: Line (modSP vs. Canton S): df = 1, χ2 = 2.14, P = 0.14, Sex: df = 1, χ2 = 8.18, P = 0.004, Line*Sex: df = 1, χ2 = 4.23, P = 0.04). (B) Relative expression of Drosomycin to RpL32 in both sexes 24 and 72 h after the injection of PBS or of P. rettgeri. Toll response (i.e., difference in Drosomycin expression between PBS and infected) was stronger in male than in females at 72 h (Interaction Sex x Treatment: df = 1, F = 10.64, P = 0.006) but we did not detect a difference at 24 h post-injection (Interaction Sex x Treatment: df = 1, F = 2.53, P = 0.13). (TIF 180 kb

Additional file 5: Figure S5. of The Toll pathway underlies host sexual dimorphism in resistance to both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria in mated Drosophila

Sexual dimorphism of the Imd pathway. (A) dTak1 loss-of-function mutants are also sexually dimorphic (Cox-ph: Sex: df = 1, χ2 = 44.2, P < 0.0001). (B) Males and females with a Relish loss-of-function mutation are still sexually dimorphic in bacterial load (Welsh t test: at 8 h: df = 2.15, t = 19.33, P = 0.04; at 12 h: df = 2.25, t = 17.26, P = 0.04). (TIF 160 kb

Additional file 1: Figure S4. of The Toll pathway underlies host sexual dimorphism in resistance to both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria in mated Drosophila

Sexual dimorphism in phagocytosis. (A) Confirmation for reduced number of phagocytes in Hml-bax lines. Females from Hml-GFP lines also had more phagocytes than males (Welsh t test: df = 6.66, t = 2.53, P = 0.04). The depletion of phagocytes in Hml-bax was major and removed the sexual dimorphism in counts (Welsh t test: df = 8.13, t = 0.86, P = 0.41). (B) Illustration by confocal microscopy of phagocytosis by P. rettgeri. Host hemocytes constitutively expressed red fluorescence, while the bacteria constitutively expressed green fluorescence. The overlay of the two color channels (red and green) shows that P. rettgeri was phagocytized by the host. (C) Left panel: Counts of phagocytes for pool of 15 females or males. Females have more phagocytes than males (Wilcoxon paired test: n = 8 per lines, V = 238, P = 0.002). One estimate for an Eater female of 1800 hemocytes and was not represented in the figure for a better display of the whole dataset. Right panel: Counts of phagocytes that phagocytized 3 h post-injection of dead E. coli. The number of active phagocytes upon injection of dead Gram-negative bacteria did not significantly differ between the sexes (Linear model (Sex being nested in experimental trials), Sex: df = 1, F = 0.89, P = 0.44). (TIF 221 kb

Additional file 3: Figure S2. of The Toll pathway underlies host sexual dimorphism in resistance to both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria in mated Drosophila

Sexual dimorphism in total mass and hemolymph quantity. (A) In the three wildtype lines, the total mass differs between lines but less than between sexes (two-way ANOVA: Line: df = 2, F = 275,92, P < 0.0001; Sex: df = 1, F = 558.11, P < 0.0001; Line*Sex: df = 2, F = 33.88, P < 0.0001). (B) In the three wildtype lines, the quantity of hemolymph differs among lines but less than between sexes (two-way ANOVA: Line: df = 2, F = 18.65, P < 0.0001; Sex: df = 1, F = 69.33, P < 0.0001; Line*Sex: df = 2, F = 3.84, P = 0.02). Females are 1.5 times larger than males at most, which is insufficient to explain the difference in bacterial load between males and females (Fig. 2) or the observation that males are resistant to 10-times larger initial does than females (Fig. 1i, Additional file 2: Figure S1B, C). (TIF 155 kb

Additional file 8: Table S1. of The Toll pathway underlies host sexual dimorphism in resistance to both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria in mated Drosophila

Count matrix for the transcriptomic analysis. This matrix contains the normalized read counts used in the DESeq2 analysis with the function “DESeqDataSetFromMatrix”. (CSV 2291 kb

Additional file 7: Figure S7. of The Toll pathway underlies host sexual dimorphism in resistance to both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria in mated Drosophila

Sexual dimorphism in clearance of Gram-negative non-pathogenic bacteria. Male and female Canton S flies are similarly capable of resisting the bacteria Ecc15 (linear regression: Time: df = 2, F = 4.29, P = 0.02; Sex: df = 1, F = 2.46, P = 0.12; Time/Sex: df = 2, F = 3.02, P = 0.05) and E. coli (Linear regression: Time: df = 2, F = 5.31, P = 0.006; Sex: df = 1, F = 0.0001, P = 0.99; Time/Sex: df = 2, F = 0.12, P = 0.89). Non-pathogenic Gram-negative bacteria are not differently controlled by male and female hosts. (TIF 161 kb

Additional file 9: Table S2. of The Toll pathway underlies host sexual dimorphism in resistance to both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria in mated Drosophila

Column information for the transcriptomic analysis. This table contains the information on the samples used in the DESeq2 analysis with the function “DESeqDataSetFromMatrix” and Additional file 8: Table S1. (CSV 1 kb