4.5 Article

Reproductive Fitness and Dietary Choice Behavior of the Genetic Model Organism Caenorhabditis elegans under Semi-Natural Conditions

Journal

MOLECULES AND CELLS
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 347-353

Publisher

KOREAN SOC MOLECULAR & CELLULAR BIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1007/s10059-010-0125-9

Keywords

carbon dioxide; FISH; oxygen; soil bacteria; soil structure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Laboratory breeding conditions of the model organism C. elegans do not correspond with the conditions in its natural soil habitat. To assess the consequences of the differences in environmental conditions, the effects of air composition, medium and bacterial food on reproductive fitness and/or dietary-choice behavior of C. elegans were investigated. The reproductive fitness of C. elegans was maximal under oxygen deficiency and not influenced by a high fractional share of carbon dioxide. In media approximating natural soil structure, reproductive fitness was much lower than in standard laboratory media. In semi-natural media, the reproductive fitness of C. elegans was low with the standard laboratory food bacterium E. coli (gamma-Proteobacteria), but significantly higher with C. arvensicola (Bacteroidetes) and B. tropica (beta-Proteobacteria) as food. Dietary-choice experiments in semi-natural media revealed a low preference of C. elegans for E. coli but significantly higher preferences for C. arvensicola and B. tropica (among other bacteria). Dietary-choice experiments under quasi-natural conditions, which were feasible by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) of bacteria, showed a high preference of C. elegans for Cytophaga-Flexibacter-Bacteroides, Firmicutes, and beta-Proteobacteria, but a low preference for gamma-Proteobacteria. The results show that data on C. elegans under standard laboratory conditions have to be carefully interpreted with respect to their biological significance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available