4.7 Review

Phenotyping of Drosophila Melanogaster-A Nutritional Perspective

期刊

BIOMOLECULES
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biom12020221

关键词

Drosophila melanogaster; high-sugar diet; high-fat diet; obesity; phenotyping

资金

  1. DFG [398035888]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article introduces the application of Drosophila melanogaster as a model organism in nutrition research, and provides a detailed description of the methods for phenotyping Drosophila. The practical application of fly phenotyping is demonstrated through a discussion of obese phenotypes in response to high-sugar diet and high-fat diet feeding. It is also found that the diets have impacts on the transcriptome and metabolome of Drosophila, which is important for understanding the underlying molecular mechanisms.
The model organism Drosophila melanogaster was increasingly applied in nutrition research in recent years. A range of methods are available for the phenotyping of D. melanogaster, which are outlined in the first part of this review. The methods include determinations of body weight, body composition, food intake, lifespan, locomotor activity, reproductive capacity and stress tolerance. In the second part, the practical application of the phenotyping of flies is demonstrated via a discussion of obese phenotypes in response to high-sugar diet (HSD) and high-fat diet (HFD) feeding. HSD feeding and HFD feeding are dietary interventions that lead to an increase in fat storage and affect carbohydrate-insulin homeostasis, lifespan, locomotor activity, reproductive capacity and stress tolerance. Furthermore, studies regarding the impacts of HSD and HFD on the transcriptome and metabolome of D. melanogaster are important for relating phenotypic changes to underlying molecular mechanisms. Overall, D. melanogaster was demonstrated to be a valuable model organism with which to examine the pathogeneses and underlying molecular mechanisms of common chronic metabolic diseases in a nutritional context.

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

4.7
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