Abstract
To understand the genetics and evolution of foraging in larvae of Drosophila funebris, we examined two strains reared at different breeding sites in the wild. Larvae of the Til–Til strain breed in necrotic cactus tissue, while those of the Pelequén strain rear in necrotic prickly pear cladodes. We measured feeding, locomotion, turning behavior, and latency of D. funebris. Til–Til and Pelequén larvae, at 8 days of age show very similar rates in all behaviors. Crosses between Til–Til and Pelequén strains decrease feeding rate and increase locomotion, turning, and latency in F1 and F2 larvae. Backcross larvae show a behavior similar to that of their parental strains. The behavioral similarities observed between the Til–Til and Pelequén strains are product of two different co-adapted gene pools. Epistasis and dominance are the principal sources upon which adaptation of the gene pools of each population are based.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arizmendi C (2004) Biometrical study of larval feeding behavior of two strains of D. pavani. Thesis to obtain Title of Teacher of Biology and Natural Sciences. Universidad Metropolitana de Ciencias de la Educación, Santiago, Chile (in Spanish)
Barker JSF, Starmer WT (1999) Environmental effects and the genetics of oviposition site preference for natural yeast substrates in Drosophila buzzatii. Hereditas 130:145–175. doi:10.1111/j.1601-5223.1999.00145.x
Bochdanovits Z, De Jong G (2003) Temperature dependence of fitness components in geographical populations of Drosophila melanogaster: changing the association between size and fitness. Biol J Linn Soc 80:717–725. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2003.00271.x
Brncic D (1987) Coexistencia de diferentes especies de Drosophila en frutas fermentadas naturalmente. Medio Ambiente 8:3–9
Burdick AB (1954) New medium of reproductive quality stable at room temperature. Drosoph Inf Serv 28:170
Carson, H (1971) The ecology of Drosophila breeding sites. The Harold L. Lyon Arboretum Lecture Number University of Hawaii, Foundation Lyon Arboretum Fund
Chakir M, Capy P, Genermont J, Pla E, David JR (1996) Adaptation to fermenting resources in Drosophila melanogaster: ethanol and acetic acid tolerances share a common genetic bases Evolution. Int J Organic Evol 50:767–776. doi:10.2307/2410849
David JR, Allemand R, Van Herrewege J, Cohet Y (1983) Ecophysiology: abiotic factors. In: Ashburner M, Carson HL, Thompson JL (eds) The genetics and biology of Drosophila, vol 3. Academic Press, London, pp 105–170
Davis JM, Stamps JA (2004) The effect of natal experience on habitat preferences. Trends Ecol Evol 19:411–416. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.04.006
Flores S (2004) Taxonomic and phylogenetic analysis of natural populations of Drosophila funebris that live in necrotic tissue of cactus Echinopsis chilensis. Ph. D. Thesis. Escuela de Postgrado, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile (in Spanish)
Fogleman JC, Abril JR (1990) Ecological and evolutionary importance of host plant chemistry. In: Barker JSF, Starmer WT, MacIntyre RJ (eds) Ecological and evolutionary genetics of Drosophila. Plenum Press, New York, pp 121–143
Fogleman JC, Danielson PB (2001) Chemical interactions in the cactus-microorganism-Drosophila model system of the Sonoran desert. Am Zool 41:877–889. doi:10.1668/0003-1569(2001)041[0877:CIITCM]2.0.CO;2
Fogleman JC, Starmer WT, Heed WB (1981) Larval selectivity for yeast species by Drosophila mojavensis in natural substrates. Proc Nat Acad Sci 78:4435–4439. doi:10.1073/pnas.78.7.4435
Godoy-Herrera R, Connoll K (2007) Organization of foraging behavior in larvae of cosmopolitan, widespread and endemic Drosophila species. Behav Genet 37:595–603. doi:10.1007/s10519-007-9151-6
Godoy-Herrera R, Burnet B, Connolly K (2004) Conservation and divergence of the genetic structure of larval foraging behaviour in two species of the Drosophila simulans clade. Heredity 92:14–19. doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6800356
Godoy-Herrera R, Burnet B, Connolly K (2005) Hybrid disadvantage in the larval foraging behaviour of the two neotropical species of Drosophila pavani and Drosophila gaucha. Genetica 124:33–40. doi:10.1007/s10709-004-5913-8
Green CH, Burnet B, Connolly K (1983) Organization and patterns of inter-and intraspecific variation on the behavior of Drosophila larvae. Anim Behav 31:282–291. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(83)80198-5
Kambysellis MP, Heed WB (1971) Studies of oogenesis in natural populations of Drosophilidae Relations of ovarian development and ecological habitats of the Hawaiian species. Am Nat 105:31–49. doi:10.1086/282700
Kearsey MJ, Pooni HS (1996) The genetical analysis of quantitative traits. Chapman and Hall, London
Manríquez G, Benado M (1994) Echinopsis chilensis (Friedrich et Roeland): an endemic breeding site for Drosophila pavani Brncic 1957. Revista Chilena de Entomologia 21:185–186
Markow T, O’Grady PM (2006) Drosophila. A guide to species identification and use. Elsevier, Amsterdan
Martin P, Bateson P (1990) Measuring behavior. An introductory guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Mather K, Jinks JL (1971) Biometrical genetics. The study of continuous variation. Chapman and Hall, London
Medina-Muñoz MC, Godoy-Herrera R (2004) Dispersal and prepupation behavior of chilean sympatric Drosophila species that breed in the same site in nature. Behav Ecol 16:316–322. doi:10.1093/beheco/arh125
Mery F, Kawecki TJ (2004) The effect of learning on experimental evolution of resource preference in Drosophila melanogaster Evolution. Int J Organic Evol 58:757–767
Muhammad-Ali AZZ, Burnet B (1995) Ethanol tolerance and variation at the alcohol dehydrogenase (Adh) locus of Drosophila mauritiana. Heredity 74:438–444. doi:10.1038/hdy.1995.61
Osborne KA, Robichon A, Burgess E, Butland S, Shaw RA, Coulthard A et al (1997) Natural behavior polymorphism due to a cGMP-dependent protein kinase of Drosophila. Science 277:834–836. doi:10.1126/science.277.5327.834
Pecsenye K, Komlost I, Saura A (2004) Heritabilities and additive genetic variances of the activities of some enzymes in Drosophila melanogaster populations living in different habitats. Heredity 93:215–221. doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6800497
Powell JR (1997) Progress and prospect in evolutionary biology The Drosophila model. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Ruiz-Dubreuil G, Burnet B, Connolly K, Furness P (1996) Larval foraging behaviour and competition in Drosophila melanogaster. Heredity 76:55–64
Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry. W F Freeman and Company, New York
Starmer WT (1981) A comparison of Drosophila habitats according to the physiological attributes of the associated yeast communities. Evolution 35:38–52
Wallace B (2000) A natural historian’s view of heterosis and related topics. In: Singh RS, Krimbas CB (eds) Evolutionary genetics. From molecules to morphology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 41–51
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to Departamento de Investigación y Desarrollo., DI 2006 ENL 06/07, Universidad de Chile, and FONDECYT 1020130. R G-H is indebted to his wife Tatiana Márquez for her support and help in preparation of the manuscript. Thanks are also extended to Dr. Marta Zlatic and Professor Susi Koref-Santibañez for their comments and suggestions concerning the manuscript. We also wish to thank two anonymous referees for their very useful comments. Our special gratitude and appreciation goes to Professor Lee Ehrman who patiently read the manuscript, making profuse comments and suggestions that greatly improve this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Edited by Yong-Kyu Kim.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arizmendi, C., Zuleta, V., Ruiz-Dubreuil, G. et al. Genetics Analysis of Larval Foraging Behavior in Drosophila Funebris . Behav Genet 38, 525–530 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-008-9217-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-008-9217-0