Fig 6.

prt¹ reproductive behavior. A) prt¹ mutant males spent 26% less time courting (*, p = 0.0182). B) The top two panels show normal copulatory positions seen in wild-type flies while the bottom two panels show improper positioning exemplary of prt¹. C) prt¹ mutants struggle throughout copulation. Quantification of the time a male spends out of position during copulation revealed a significant difference between CS and prt¹ (first two bars, p < 0.001). Inter-genotype pairings suggest the prt¹ male was responsible for this phenotype (last two bars, p < 0.01). D) Two different deficiencies uncovered prt. Both prt¹/Df(3R)mbc-30 and prt¹/Df(3R)Exel6195 phenocopied the copulation behavior seen in prt¹ (last two columns, p < 0.05 and 0.001, respectively). E) prt¹ mutants were fertile but had reduced fecundity (# progeny/mating pair), 53% that of CS (*, p = 0.0167). * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001. Statistical analyses included Student’s t-test for A & E and ANOVA with Bonferroni’s post test for multiple comparisons for all other assays. Bars represent means ± SEMs. The n for each group is shown with each column. See also Movies S1 and S2, and Fig S3.