SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
imb12011-sup-0001-si.docx425K

Figure S1. A representative figure to describe the methods used to test host/symbiont-enriched library fidelity including two positive and one negative samples. The lanes are 1: termite whole body cDNA; 2–3: head cDNA; 4–5: head genomic DNA; 6–7: gut cDNA; 8–9: gut genomic DNA; 10: no template water control. The primer pair that amplified across the gut and head DNA samples was from the host library, whereas, the primer pair that only amplified across the gut DNA samples, and not the head, was from the symbiont library. The representative samples shown here are (A) TG_07_D12; (B) TS_33_E2; (C) TS_38_B3. The first two samples showed library fidelity to host and symbiont library, respectively. The third sample did not because although obtained from the symbiont-specific library it was positive across head cDNA and genomic DNA. The library fidelity of all the primer pairs is given in Table S3 (p S63−S64).

Table S1. Wood-abundant transcripts. (NSM, no significant matches.) The individual contigs are listed according to the fold-change. The gene ontology (GO) terms were obtained from BLAST2GO.

Table S2. Paper-abundant transcripts. (NSM, no significant matches.) The individual contigs are listed according to the fold-change. The gene ontology (GO) terms were obtained from BLAST2GO.

Table S3. List of quantitative real-time PCR primer pairs with their sequence and result of the library fidelity.

Table S4. (A) KEGG pathway table from BLAST2GO for wood-abundant expressed sequence tags (ESTs) only; (B) KEGG pathway table from BLAST2GO for paper-abundant ESTs only; (C) KEGG pathway table from BLAST2GO common for both paper- and wood-abundant genes.

Please note: Neither the Editors nor Wiley Blackwell are responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting materials supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing material) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.