qin Encodes a Protein with Five Tudor and One E3 Ligase Domain
FlyBase (
Drysdale et al., 2005) predicts that the putative transcription unit
CG14303 encodes a protein with five Tudor domains ( and
S1). Disruption of
CG14303 by insertion of a piggyBac transposon ({RB}PBacCG14303e03728;
Thibault et al., 2004) in the largest predicted exon caused female sterility and produced embryos with fused or missing dorsal appendages (
Table S1), phenotypes associated with a failure of the piRNA pathway (
Schupbach and Wieschaus, 1989;
Schupbach and Wieschaus, 1991;
Wilson et al., 1996;
Theurkauf et al., 2006;
Chen et al., 2007;
Klattenhoff et al., 2007). Because
CG14303 mutant females produce offspring that fail to develop into adults, we named the gene
qin, after the ancient Chinese dynasty (

) that ended after just two generations.
PBac{RB}CG14303e03728 (
qin1) homozygotes produced few eggs, all of which display dorsal appendage defects (
Table S1). Similarly, only 4.3% of embryos from
qin1/Df(3R)Excel6180 females had wild-type appendages (
Table S1 and and
S2), suggesting that mutation of
qin causes the observed phenotypes. The deficiency
Df(3R)Excel6180, henceforth
Df, removes
qin as well as other genes (
Figure S2;
Parks et al., 2004). Although
qin1 is predicted to encode a truncated protein,
qin1 behaved like a genetic null allele: the dorsal appendage phenotype, egg hatching, and eggs laid per day per female were as severe or worse in
qin1 homozygotes compared to
qin1/
Df (
Table S1).
To further verify that these defects resulted from mutation of
qin, we attempted to rescue
qin1/
Df by creating a transgenic fly expressing genomic fragment CH322-81J04 (henceforth, gf-1;
Venken et al., 2009), which encompasses
CG14303 (). The gf-1 transgene failed to rescue the defects in
qin1/
Df ovaries, eggs, and embryos (
Table S1 and ). Moreover, the transgene carrying gf-1 generated a transcript that was shorter than wild -type
qin mRNA (). To understand why gf-1 failed to rescue, we mapped the 52 end of the
qin mRNA by rapid amplification of cDNA ends (52 RACE). The 52 end of the
qin mRNA mapped 51,682 bp upstream of
CG14303, in the putative gene
CG14306, which is predicted to encode a protein with a RING domain and two B-Box domains, the hallmarks of a Ubiquitin or SUMO E3 ligase (, and
S1).
In control (
w1118) ovaries, a Northern hybridization probe for
CG14306 detected the same size mRNA as a probe for
CG14303 (). Probes for
CG14306 and
CG14303 both detected a longer RNA in
qin1 whose size is consistent with transcription of three exons in
CG14306 and five exons plus part of a sixth in
CG14303 fused to PBac{RB}
CG14303e03728, the piggyBac insertion that creates the
qin1 allele. Neither hybridization probe detected the
qin mRNA in ovaries from females bearing both the deficiency and PBac{RB}
e01936 (
qin2), a piggyBac insertion 52 to the first predicted exon of
CG14306 ( and
S3A). Consistent with
qin encompassing both
CG14306 and
CG14303,
qin2 failed to complement
qin1 (
Figure S3B). Moreover, a cDNA comprising the predicted exons of
CG14306 and
CG14303 (UASp-(FLAG)
3-(Myc)
6-Qin, henceforth FM-Qin) and driven from a UASp promoter by
nanos-Gal4-VP16, partially rescued the female sterility and dorsal appendage (
Table S1) and transposon silencing defects associated with loss of Qin (). (The incomplete rescue m ay reflect the poor expression of
nanos-Gal4-VP16 in stage 2–6 egg chambers (
Figure S3A) (
Ni et al., 2011) or an effect of the amino-terminal FLAG-Myc tag on Qin function or stability.)
As a final test of the idea that the
qin locus comprises both
CG14303 and
CG14306, we constructed a transgenic fly bearing a 97,532 bp genomic fragment (gf-2, CH321-88L14) (
Venken et al., 2009) encompassing all of the
qin exons, as well as 6,602 bp 52 to exon 1 and 32,343 bp 32 to exon 10 ( and
S3B). To facilitate detection of the predicted Qin protein encoded by gf-2, we inserted the EGFP coding sequence before the
qin stop codon of the genomic fragment. Gf-2 includes part or all of the
qin promoter, because transgenic flies bearing gf-2 expressed the Qin::EGFP fusion in the germline throughout oogenesis (
Figure S3C). A single copy of gf-2 partially rescued the dorsal appendage defects, low egg hatch rate, and the low number of eggs laid per day per fly observed for
w; Sp/ +;
qin1/
Df females (
Table S1). We conclude that the
qin locus comprises the three exons of
CG14306 and the seven exons of
CG14303 joined by the removal of a 51,682 nt intron and that the Qin protein contains an amino-terminal E3 ligase domain and five carboxy-terminal Tudor domains ( and
S1).
Qin is Required to Protect the Germline Genome and Silence Transposons
Defects in the piRNA pathway cause double-stranded breaks in the germline genome, and γH2Av, a phosphorylated histone variant, accumulates at the sites of DNA damage (
Theurkauf et al., 2006;
Chen et al., 2007;
Klattenhoff et al., 2007). Homozygous
qin1,
qin1/Df, and
qin2/Df mutant ovaries showed many nuclear γH2Av foci ( and
S4), unlike control ovaries, which displayed only the expected small number of γH2Av foci likely to be associated with normal endoreduplication () or meiotic recombination (
Figure S4). The increased number and intensity of γH2Av foci in
qin mutants suggest that Qin is required for transposon silencing.
We used whole-genome tiling microarrays to survey the expression of transposons and mRNAs in
qin mutant ovaries. In
qin mutants, 56 of 93 transposon families showed a 1.5- to 3-fold increase in steady-state transcript abundance (). The expression of another 13 transposon families increased more than 3-fold (False Discovery Rate, FDR, < 0.1). In contrast, the expression of none of the 19,987 protein coding genes detected by the microarray, including 613 annotated heterochromatic genes (
Smith et al., 2007), increased or decreased >3-fold at FDR < 0.1 (
Figure S5). We used quantitative RT-PCR to measure the expression of those elements that increased more than 3-fold with an FDR < 0.1 in the microarray data. Of the 13 such transposon families, 11 showed a statistically significant increase in RNA expression when measured by qRT-PCR (
Table S2). For example, expression of the transposon
HeT-A increased 72-fold (
p-value = 0.004),
Springer increased 55-fold (
p-value = 0.002), and
Burdock increased 41-fold (
p-value = 0.006).
The transposon families whose expression increased in
qin mutants correspond to a subset of those transposons whose silencing requires Ago3 (; Pearson correlation,
r = 0.77,
p-value < 10
−16). In contrast, the transposons hyper-expressed in
qin mutants and those activated in
aub mutants were more weakly correlated (;
r = 0.58,
p-value = 1.7 × 10
−9). A single copy transgene expressing full length
qin cDNA in the germline via a UASp promoter driven by a
nanos-Gal4-VP16 transgene restored transposon silencing ().
ZAM, a transposon silenced by Piwi in the somatic follicle cells (
Brennecke et al., 2007;
Mevel-Ninio et al., 2007;
Desset et al., 2008;
Malone et al., 2009), was unaffected in
qin1/
qin1 and
qin1/
Df ovaries (). We also did not detect a change in the expression of
blood, a transposon thought to be silenced in both the germline and the follicle cells (
Li et al., 2009;
Malone et al., 2009).
In testes, piRNAs silence the multi-copy gene
Stellate, a gene whose hyper-expression causes Stellate protein crystals to form during spermatogenesis, reducing male fertility (
Hardy, 1980;
Balakireva et al., 1992;
Aravin et al., 2001;
Vagin et al., 2006). Anti-
Stellate piRNAs derive from transcripts from the many copies of
Suppressor of Stellate (
Su(Ste)) (
Hardy et al., 1984;
Livak, 1984;
Livak, 1990;
Balakireva et al., 1992). Accumulation of
Su(Ste)-derived piRNAs requires Aub (
Aravin et al., 2004) and Ago3 (
Li et al., 2009), but not Piwi (
Vagin et al., 2006).
Stellate silencing also requires Qin. Stellate crystals accumulated in the testes of
qin1/
Df mutant males but not their heterozygous siblings (). Expression of FM-Qin cDNA in testes restored
Stellate silencing ().
Qin Co-localizes with Ago3 and Aub in Nuage
To define the subcellular distribution of Qin, we examined the localization of the Qin::EGFP fusion encoded by the 97,532 bp genomic fragment gf-2. We detected EGFP fluorescence in the germline throughout oogenesis, but not in the somatic follicle cells (
Figure S3C). Together with the finding that a FM-Qin cDNA expressed in the germline rescued the dorsal appendage defects and sterility of
qin mutant females and rescued
Stellate silencing in males, these data suggest that Qin acts mainly or solely in the germline.
The Qin::EGFP fusion protein produced by the gf-2 transgene and the epitope tagged FM-Qin produced by the full-length
qin cDNA transgene expressed from a UASp promoter driven by
nanos-Gal4-VP16 were both predominately cytoplasmic and localized in perinuclear foci typical for nuage (
Figures S3A and S3C). Moreover, in all nurse cells examined (
n = 30, two measurements for each nurse cell), quantitative fluorescence microscopy showed that Qin::EGFP co-localized with Aub and Ago3 (), which have been shown previously to localize to nuage (
Harris and Macdonald, 2001;
Snee and Macdonald, 2004;
Brennecke et al., 2007;
Lim and Kai, 2007). However, mutation of
qin did not appear to affect the assembly or stability of nuage, as Aub and Ago3 all retained their perinuclear, punctate distribution in both
qin1/Df and
qin2/
Df ovaries (
Figure S6). Neither a truncated Qin protein comprising the Qin E3 ligase-like domain alone nor a truncated Qin protein comprising the five Tudor domains but missing the E3 ligase domain localized to nuage (
Figure S3A) or rescued the phenotypic defects observed in
qin mutant ovaries (data not shown).
Compared with
qin heterozygotes, the abundance of Ago3, Aub, and Piwi was not significantly changed in
qin mutants ( and
S7). We did observe a small decrease in Ago3 abundance in the absence of Qin, but this 27% reduction is unlikely to explain the defects observed in
qin mutants for two reasons. First, over-expression of Ago3 in the germline of
qin mutant ovaries failed to rescue female sterility (hatch rate = 1.1%,
n = 1,031). Second, the abundance of Ago3 was lower in
ago3 heterozygotes than in
qin1/Df ovaries, yet
ago3/TM6B females are fertile, lay eggs with wild -type dorsal appendages, and silence their transposons (
Li et al., 2009).
Compared with the control strain (
w1118), the abundance of Vasa increased in both
qin heterozygous and mutant ovaries ( and
S7), although its localization to nuage was not detectably altered (
Figure S6). Both
qin heterozygous and mutant ovaries contained an additional Vasa isoform, likely phosphorylated Vasa, which has been associated with loss of transposon silencing and DNA damage in the germline (
Ghabrial and Schupbach, 1999;
Abdu et al., 2002;
Chen et al., 2007;
Klattenhoff et al., 2007).
The Ratio of Sense to Antisense piRNAs Increases in qin Mutants
qin mutants show little change in the total abundance of piRNAs: the percent of genome-mapping, small RNA sequence reads corresponding to transposon-derived, 23–29 nt small RNAs was essentially indistinguishable among control (
cn1;
ry506; 360,387/ 949,504 = 38%),
qin/ TM6B heterozygous (5,558,981/ 14,619,724 = 38%), and
qin1/Df mutant (6,064,405/ 16,096,174 = 38%) ovaries ( and
Table S3A and S3B). However, the effects of mutation of
qin on the structure of piRNA populations can be readily detected by analyzing the fraction of piRNAs bearing the sense orientation (sense fraction = sense/ [sense + antisense]) for each of the 93 transposon families for which we sequenced = 100 parts per million (ppm) piRNA reads in both control and
qin/ TM6B ovaries. Mutation of
qin increased the median sense fraction for the 93 transposon families fr om 0.24 for the control ovaries to 0.33 for
qin heterozygotes and 0.41 for
qin1/Df mutants. We note that an increase in sense fraction implies a decrease in the
proportion—but not necessarily the abundance—of antisense piRNAs, those piRNAs believed to direct transposon silencing.
One potential explanation for an increase in sense piRNAs in
qin mutant ovaries is that the increased abundance of transposon transcripts directly feeds the production of sense piRNAs. In this view, the observed increase in the fraction of sense piRNAs would be a consequence, rather than the cause, of the loss of transposon silencing in
qin mutant ovaries. To test this idea, we compared the change in transposon transcript abundance to the change in sense piRNA abundance for the 93 transposon families we analyzed (
Figure S8A). Transposon expression and sense piRNA abundance were uncorrelated, even when we restricted our analysis to only those 11 transposon families whose expression increased significantly. We conclude that increased transposon expression cannot explain the increased sense piRNA abundance in
qin mutant ovaries.
Among the 93 transposon families analyzed, 27 lost more than half their antisense piRNAs in
qin1/
Df ovaries (; analyses of each transposon family are available at
http://www.umassmed.edu/zamore/datasets.aspx?linkidentifier=id&itemid=66736). The median abundance of antisense piRNAs for these 27 transposon families in
qin1/
Df ovaries was 32% of their median in the control, whereas the median sense piRNA abundance in
qin1/
Df ovaries was 67% of the control median. Consequently, the piRNA populations from these 27 transposon families became less antisense and more sense biased. That is, loss of antisense piRNAs and not gain of sense piRNAs underlies the increase in sense fraction for these transposon families. Of the 27 transposon families, eight were among the 11 families that showed significantly elevated steady-state mRNA expression in
qin1/Df compared with control ovaries (). Overall, antisense piRNAs from the 11 derepressed transposon families decreased more than those from the other 82 transposon families (
p-value = 0.018, Wilcoxon rank-sum test), suggesting that loss of antisense piRNAs caused the transposon desilencing. This correlation was particularly striking for
HeT-A,
Burdock,
TAHRE, and
I element, whose expression increased ~40-, 38-, 21-, and 14-fold in
qin mutants and whose antisense piRNA pools declined to only 14%, 18%, 35%, and 21% of control levels (
Table S2A).
Of the remaining 66 transposon families, antisense piRNA abundance either increased or decreased by less than a factor of two for 59 families, and more than doubled for 7 families. While the median antisense piRNA abundance for these 66 families was unchanged from control, median sense piRNA abundance increased 2.3-fold (
p-value = 5.7 × 10
−10, two-tailed, paired t-test; ). Even for these transposons, the normal antisense bias of piRNAs was reduced in
qin mutant ovaries. Notably,
copia expression increased 23-fold and
Transpac expression increased 14-fold in
qin mutant ovaries, yet
copia antisense piRNA abundance increased 3-fold and
Transpac antisense piRNA abundance was unchanged, compared to
cn1;
ry506 control ovaries (
Table S2A). Thus, our data suggest that the ratio of sense to antisense piRNAs, not sim ply the abundance of antisense piRNAs, determines the efficacy of piRNAs in silencing transposons. The data also suggest that Qin acts to maintain the antisense bias of transposon piRNA populations.
Indeed, 74 of the 93 transposon families we analyzed had a greater piRNA sense fraction (
qin mutants – control > 0.05) in the ovaries of the
qin mutants than in the control (). The proportion of sense piRNAs declined in
qin mutants compared with control (control –
qin heterozygotes > 0.05) for only 6 transposon families (
accord2,
diver2,
hopper, hopper2,
gypsy, and
gyspsy12). Among these, four families (
accord2,
diver2,
hopper, hopper2) correspond to transposons whose
sense piRNAs have been previously shown to be loaded into Aub, causing
antisense piRNAs to accumulate in Ago3 (
Brennecke et al., 2007;
Li et al., 2009;
Malone et al., 2009). It is not known if the Ago3-bound antisense piRNAs act to repress these elements. A fifth transposon family,
gypsy, is thought to be active in the somatic follicle cells surrounding the oocyte where it is silenced by a mechanism that requires Piwi but not Aub or Ago3 (
Li et al., 2009;
Malone et al., 2009). We do not currently understand the mechanism that causes the sixth transposon family,
gypsy12, to gain antisense piRNAs in
qin1/
Df ovaries.
The overall increase in the fraction of piRNAs corresponding to sense sequences was reflected in the sense fraction of piRNAs bound to Aub in
qin mutant ovaries: among the 93 transposon families analyzed, the median sense fraction for the piRNAs co-immunoprecipitated with Aub increased from 0.31 in
qin heterozygotes to 0.42 in
qin mutants (); the median sense fraction of Aub-bound piRNAs in wild-type Oregon R ovaries is 0.16 (
Brennecke et al., 2007). In contrast, the sense fraction of piRN As bound to Piwi was essentially unaltered in
qin mutant ovaries (
Figure S8B). Perhaps the excess sense piRNA bound to Aub in
qin mutant ovaries sequesters factors needed for antisense piRNAs to direct transposon silencing.
Qin is Required to Maintain Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong
To understand why in qin mutants the proportion of sense piRNAs increased for so many transposon families, we examined the frequency of Ping-Pong piRNA pairs among the piRNAs bound to Aub and Ago3. The first 10 nt of Ping-Pong piRNA pairs are complementary, evidence of piRNA amplification by reciprocal cycles of cleavage by PIWI proteins, typically Aub and Ago3. Our preliminary analysis, in which we used only piRNA sequence reads unique to Ago3, Aub, or Piwi immunoprecipitates detected no significant Ping-Pong between Piwi and Ago3, Piwi and Aub, or Piwi and itself (z-scores = 2.8, i.e., p-value = 0.05). Because so many Aub-bound species are also bound to Piwi, but Piwi participates so little in Ping-Pong, we analyzed the piRNAs bound to Ago3 or Aub, excluding only species bound to both Ago3 and Aub. In contrast to our previously published Ping-Pong analyses, we computed a z-score for the occurrence of Ping-Pong piRNA pairs using a method that is uninfluenced by sequencing depth (JX and ZW, manuscript in preparation).
The Ping-Pong model for piRNA amplification suggests a simple explanation for the effect of mutation of
qin: in
qin mutants homotypic Ping-Pong between Aub and itself replaces heterotypic Ping-Pong between Aub and Ago3. Homotypic Ping-Pong, which occurs at low levels in control ovaries, is predicted to generate equal amounts of sense and antisense piRNAs. Thus, homotypic Ping-Pong is predicted to diminish the antisense bias of the piRNA population (
Brennecke et al., 2007;
Gunawardane et al., 2007;
Malone et al., 2009). Aub:Aub homotypic Ping-Pong dominates in
ago3 mutants, which not only disrupt piRNA amplification and produce fewer piRNAs overall, but also show increased piRNA sense fraction (
Li et al., 2009).
To test if inappropriate Aub:Aub Ping-Pong replaced productive Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong in
qin mutant ovaries, we calculated Ping-Pong
z-scores for Aub:Aub, Aub:Ago3, and Ago3:Ago3 pairs, using only those piRNAs that could be assigned uniquely to Ago3 or Aub. In
qin heterozygotes, Ping-Pong between Aub and Ago3 predominated (), with far more Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong pairs (
z-score = 25) detected than Aub:Aub (
z-score = 13) or Ago3:Ago3 (
z-score = 3.9). In
qin mutants, far fewer Aub-bound piRNAs showed the characteristic 10 nt 52 complementarity to Ago3-bound piRNAs (Aub:Ago3
z-score = 12), and Aub:Aub Ping-Pong emerged as the main pairing (Aub:Aub
z-score = 26); Ago3:Ago3 Ping-Pong was lost (
z-score = 1.8; and
S8C).
HeT-A,
Springer,
Burdock,
I element,
Transpac, and
TAHRE, six of the seven transposons that had the greatest increase in transposon expression, all switched from Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong to Aub:Aub Ping-Pong in
qin mutants (
Table S2B).
Intriguingly, a single transposon family, the non-long-terminal-repeat retroelement
Doc, was hyper-silenced in both
qin and
ago3 mutant ovaries.
Doc expression decreased 2.6-fold in
ago3 (
Li et al., 2009) and 3.7-fold in
qin, even though seemingly inappropriate Aub:Aub Ping-Pong increased (the Aub:Aub
z-score for
Doc increased from 7.3 to 21), normally productive Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong decreased (the
z-score decreased from 12 to 4.5), the proportion of piRNAs antisense to
Doc declined, the abundance of antisense piRNAs for
Doc was unchanged, and the abundance of sense piRNAs more than doubled. We do not currently understand why
qin and
ago3 mutants show enhanced
Doc silencing.
We envision that in wild -type ovaries, piRNAs shared between Aub and Ago3 correspond to secondary piRNAs generated by Aub:Aub and by Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong, respectively. In qin mutants, Aub:Aub Ping-Pong occurs more often and Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong occurs less frequently. Therefore, mutation of qin should decrease the number of secondary piRNAs common to Aub and Ago3. Consistent with this idea, the fraction of piRNAs shared between Ago3 and Aub declined from 37% in qin/ TM6B to 13% in qin1/Df ovaries (p-value < 2.2 × 10−16, Fisher’s exact test).
When Aub participates in heterotypic Ping-Pong, Aub-bound sense piRNAs often begin with uridine (U) but rarely contain an adenosine (A) at position 10. Primary piRNAs derived from cluster transcripts are believed to begin with U, whereas a position 10 A is the signature of a secondary piRNA produced by the Ping-Pong mechanism. (Aub-bound secondary piRNAs generated by cleavage of longer RNAs by Ago3-bound secondary piRNAs also typically begin with U, but cannot be distinguished from primary piRNAs on that basis.) We computed the nucleotide composition for all Aub- and Ago3-bound piRNAs ( and
S9A) and for the subset of piRNAs that had a Ping-Pong partner piRNA (). Aub-bound sense piRNAs were more likely to begin with U in
qin heterozygous ovaries than in
qin mutant ovaries ( and
S9A). Conversely, Aub-bound sense piRNAs were more likely to have an A at position 10 in
qin mutants than in heterozygotes, consistent with the emergence in the mutant ovaries of inappropriate Aub:Aub Ping-Pong that produces Aub-bound, sense secondary piRNAs. The Aub-bound putative secondary piRNAs did not, however, favor an initial U (). These data suggest that the strong tendency for Aub-bound primary piRNAs to begin with U does not reflect an intrinsic property of Aub, but rather derives from a step in piRNA production before Aub loading, such as fragmentation of primary piRNA transcripts.
Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong continues in qin mutants, but it no longer comprises the majority of Ping-Pong interactions. Ping-Pong between Aub and Ago3 declined both for Aub-bound antisense piRNAs that Ping-Pong with Ago3-bound sense piRNAs (z-score = 20.2 in qin heterozygotes; 12.5 in qin1/ Df) and for Aub-bound sense piRNAs that Ping-Pong with Ago3-bound antisense piRNAs (z-score = 16.9 qin heterozygotes; 11.4 in qin1/ Df). Despite the replacement in qin mutants of Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong with Aub:Aub Ping-Pong as the main mechanism for piRNA amplification, Ago3-bound piRNAs that participate in Ping-Pong in qin1/ Df ovaries retained their 10A signature (). That is, those Ago3 piRNAs—all of which are expected to be secondary piRNAs—that are still made in qin1/Df ovaries appear to be mainly generated by Aub-catalyzed RNA cleavage directed by piRNAs bearing a U at position 1, rather than by the Aub-bound secondary piRNAs produced by Aub:Aub Ping-Pong that bear an A at position 10.
To understand why, we set out to quantify Ago3-bound tertiary piRNAs generated by Aub:Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong. We readily detected Aub-bound piRNAs that bear an A at position 10 and Ping-Pong with Ago3-bound piRNAs. These Ago3-bound piRNAs would be expected to begin with U, but might also fortuitously contain an A at position 10, making it difficult to determine whether they represent the product of an Aub-bound primary piRNA (i.e., U at position 1) or an Aub-bound secondary piRNA generated by Aub:Aub Ping-Pong (i.e., an A at position 10). To avoid this ambiguity, we restricted our analysis to Ago3-bound piRNAs that begin with U but bear a C, G, or U but not an A at position 10. Such “1U, non-10A” piRNAs comprised ~4.9% of all Ago3-bound piRNAs possessing Ping-Pong partners in qin heterozygotes, but encompassed ~8.2% of all Ago3-bound piRNAs with Ping-Pong partners in qin1/ Df mutant ovaries. We conclude that the increase in Aub-bound secondary piRNAs generated by inappropriate Aub:Aub Ping-Pong in qin mutants leads to a corresponding increase in Ago3-bound tertiary piRNAs generated by Aub:Aub:Ago3 Ping-Pong. These tertiary piRNAs do not generate a 1U signature in the Ago3 piRNA sequence logos, likely because most Ago3-bound piRNAs are still produced by Aub-bound primary piRNAs even in qin1/ Df mutant ovaries.