Fig. 2

Flowchart of the analysis steps in the manuscript. The red double arrows indicate DE analyses and red labels the resulting DE annotations. a Details of the experiment conducted for this study (yielding three DE annotations: AvH, AvR, and RvH). b Details on the positional dataset of Arbore et al. (2015). The stippled red lines on the schematic drawing of the worm indicate the levels at which worms were amputated to produce the four fragments indicated below. These fragments were then used to identify genes that were DE in the body regions shown in colour (yielding four DE annotations: non-specific, testis region, ovary region, and tail region). c Details on the dataset of Grudniewska et al. (2016). The top row shows the identification of candidates using FACS and the bottom row the approach using irradiation to remove proliferating cells, permitting the annotation of transcripts with germline- and neoblast-biased expression (yielding three DE annotations: germline_FACS, neoblast_FACS, and neoblast-strict). d Details of the social dataset of Ramm et al. (2019). Comparisons between worms grown in different social group sizes permit identifying socially-sensitive transcripts (yielding three DE annotations: OvI, OvP, and BOTH)