Fig 1.
Mussels with white (left) and purple (right) nacre.
Table 1.
Primers used in this study.
Fig 2.
Phylogenetic analysis of HcCPOX from Hyriopsis cumingii and related species.
GenBank accession numbers: Crassostrea gigas (EKC32626.1), Mizuhopecten yessoensis (OWF48267.1), Meretrix meretrix (AMY96566.1), Hyriopsis cumingii (KX447817), Danio rerio (NP_001035183.2), Homo sapiens (NP_005247182.1), Mus musculus (NP_031783.2), Apis cerana cerana (PBC27150.1), Aplysia californica (AAP34327.1), and Penaeus vannamei (ROT62892.1). Numbers are the bootstrap values for 1000 trials.
Fig 3.
Relative expression of HcCPOX.
The relative expression of HcCPOX in various tissues from white (A) and purple (B) mussels. Comparisons of HcCPOX expression in white and purple mussels (C). FM, fringe mantle; MM, middle mantle; AM, adductor muscle; G, gill; F, foot; H, hepatopancreas; B, hemolymph. Bars with different letters or * indicate significant differences (p < 0.05), the same as below.
Fig 4.
In situ hybridization analysis of HcCPOX in the mantle.
Panel B was a higher magnification of panel A. Panel C represents the negative control (using the sense probe). IF, inner fold; MF, middle fold; OF, outer fold. The arrows indicate the location of the positive signals.
Fig 5.
Coproporphyrinogen-III oxidase activity in tissues from white and purple mussels.
G, gill; FM, fringe mantle; F, foot; B, hemolymph.
Fig 6.
Effects of HcCPOX knockdown by RNAi.
A, RNAi attenuated HcCPOX expression after RNAi. B, RNAi attenuated coproporphyrinogen-III oxidase activity after RNAi. G, gill; FM, fringe mantle; F, foot; B, hemolymph.