Extended Data Fig. 1: Roles of Set1 and NSD2 in tick biology.

a,b, Comparisons of the Set1 and NSD2 gene models by VectorBase (blue) and NCBI (green). Raw Iso-Seq reads are shown in the bottom (grey). c, RT-qPCR analysis of Set1 and NSD2 RNA in unfed, 8 h-, 24 h-, 48 h- and 72 h-fed ticks post placement on naïve mice. Error bars show the mean with SEM from four biological replicates. d, RT-qPCR analysis of Set1 and NSD2 RNA in 8 h-fed ticks post placement on naïve mice. Separate groups of ticks were injected with dsGFP, dsSet1, or dsNSD2. Error bars show the mean with SEM from four biological replicates (n = 4); two-tailed Mann–Whitney U-test. e, Impact of RNAi on tick engorgement time during feeding. The percentage of ticks collected after 96, 120, 144, and 168 h of tick placement on mice are shown. Error bars denote the mean with SEM from three biological replicates. f, Impact of RNAi on tick engorgement success. The total percentage of ticks collected after completion of tick feeding is shown. Error bars denote the mean with SEM from three biological replicates (n = 3); Student’s t-test. g, Impact of RNAi on tick weight. The weights of fully engorged ticks (mg) are shown, with each data point representing one nymph. Error bars denote the mean with SEM from three biological replicates of 25 ticks from each group; two-tailed Mann–Whitney U-test. h, Impact of RNAi on tick molting. The percentage of fully engorged nymphs that molted into adult ticks is shown. Error bars denote the mean with SEM from three biological replicates (n = 3); Student’s t-test.