3.9 Article

Macroglomeruli for fruit odors change blend preference in Drosophila

期刊

NATURWISSENSCHAFTEN
卷 97, 期 12, 页码 1059-1066

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00114-010-0727-2

关键词

Drosophila sechellia; Olfaction; Evolution; Specialization; Antennal lobes

资金

  1. MIUR, International Interuniversity Cooperation
  2. [ICE3]
  3. [2007-1491]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The olfactory circuitry of Drosophila melanogaster is becoming increasingly clear. However, how olfactory processing translates into appropriate behavioral responses is still poorly understood. Using a sibling species approach, we tested how a perturbation in the olfactory circuitry affects odor preference. In a previous study, we found that the sibling species of D. melanogaster, the specialist D. sechellia, overrepresents a sensillum, ab3, the A neuron of which is sensitive to hexanoate esters, characteristic of the species' sole host, the Morinda citrifolia fruit. Concordantly, the corresponding glomerulus, DM2, is enlarged. In this study, we found that the ab3B neuron, the expansion of which was previously assumed to be pleiotropic and of no ecological significance, is in fact tuned to another morinda fruit volatile, 2-heptanone (HP). Axons of this neuron type arborize in a second enlarged glomerulus. In behavioral experiments we tested how this has affected the fly's odor preference. We demonstrate that D. sechellia has a reversed preference for the key ligands of these macroglomeruli, especially at high concentrations. Whereas D. melanogaster was repelled by high concentrations of these odors, D. sechellia was highly attracted. This was the case for odors presented singly, but more notably for blends thereof. Our study indicates that relatively simple changes, such as a shift in sensillar abundance, and concordant shifts in glomerular size, can distort the resulting olfactory code, and can lead to saltatory shifts in odor preference. D. sechellia has exploited this to align its olfactory preference with its ecological niche.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据