FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2030837504> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2030837504 endingPage "794" @default.
• W2030837504 startingPage "780" @default.
• W2030837504 abstract "Deciphering the genetic and neurobiological underpinnings of social behavior is a difficult task. Simple model organisms such as C. elegans, Drosophila, and social insects display a wealth of social behaviors similar to those in more complex animals, including social dominance, group decision making, learning from experienced individuals, and foraging in groups. Although the study of social interactions is still in its infancy, the ability to assess the contributions of gene expression, neural circuitry, and the environment in response to social context in these simple model organisms is unsurpassed. Here, I take a comparative approach, discussing selected examples of social behavior across species and highlighting the common themes that emerge. Deciphering the genetic and neurobiological underpinnings of social behavior is a difficult task. Simple model organisms such as C. elegans, Drosophila, and social insects display a wealth of social behaviors similar to those in more complex animals, including social dominance, group decision making, learning from experienced individuals, and foraging in groups. Although the study of social interactions is still in its infancy, the ability to assess the contributions of gene expression, neural circuitry, and the environment in response to social context in these simple model organisms is unsurpassed. Here, I take a comparative approach, discussing selected examples of social behavior across species and highlighting the common themes that emerge. The social environment affects behavior across species, from microbes to humans (Benabentos et al., 2009Benabentos R. Hirose S. Sucgang R. Curk T. Katoh M. Ostrowski E.A. Strassmann J.E. Queller D.C. Zupan B. Shaulsky G. Kuspa A. Polymorphic members of the lag gene family mediate kin discrimination in Dictyostelium.Curr. Biol. 2009; 19: 567-572Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (53) Google Scholar). Social behavior is broadly defined here as an interaction between members of the same species that changes their subsequent behavior. Investigating the mechanisms underlying social behavior becomes increasingly more challenging as you move up the phylogenetic tree. Simple animals such as nematodes, flies, and bees have simpler behaviors, smaller genomes, and simpler nervous systems than more complex animals such as mammals. And yet, simple animal models have much to tell us about social behavior. Simple and more complex animals share many common behaviors, including courtship and mating, aggression, parenting, foraging, learning, and memory. Many of the social behaviors exhibited by simple animals are reminiscent of social behaviors in more complex animals. For example, mate copying is observed in both complex animals (for example see Godin et al., 2005Godin J.G. Herdman E.J.E. Dugatkin L.A. Social influences on female mate choice in the guppy, Poecilia reticulate: generalized and repeatable trait-copying behavour.Anim. Behav. 2005; 69: 999-1005Crossref Scopus (55) Google Scholar, White and Galef, 2000White D.J. Galef Jr., B.G. Differences between the sexes in direction and duration of response to seeing a potential sex partner mate with another.Anim. Behav. 2000; 59: 1235-1240Crossref PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar) and the fruit fly (Mery et al., 2009Mery F. Varela S.A. Danchin E. Blanchet S. Parejo D. Coolen I. Wagner R.H. Public versus personal information for mate copying in an invertebrate.Curr. Biol. 2009; 19: 730-734Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (62) Google Scholar). Additionally, aggressive interactions in the fruit fly could lead to the formation of dominance hierarchies. After an inexperienced male watches two males fight, he alters his subsequent behavior accordingly, depending on whether he encounters the loser or winner (Yurkovic et al., 2006Yurkovic A. Wang O. Basu A.C. Kravitz E.A. Learning and memory associated with aggression in Drosophila melanogaster.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2006; 103: 17519-17524Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar). Behavioral changes can depend on group size and composition. Sleep need varies with group size (Ganguly-Fitzgerald et al., 2006Ganguly-Fitzgerald I. Donlea J. Shaw P.J. Waking experience affects sleep need in Drosophila.Science. 2006; 313: 1775-1781Crossref PubMed Scopus (101) Google Scholar), and individuals are affected by the food choices made by other animals (Tinette et al., 2004Tinette S. Zhang L. Robichon A. Cooperation between Drosophila flies in searching behavior.Genes Brain Behav. 2004; 3: 39-50Crossref PubMed Scopus (24) Google Scholar). The circadian clock is also affected by social signals that vary with group membership (Levine et al., 2002Levine J.D. Funes P. Dowse H.B. Hall J.C. Resetting the circadian clock by social experience in Drosophila melanogaster.Science. 2002; 298: 2010-2012Crossref PubMed Scopus (109) Google Scholar, Fujii et al., 2007Fujii S. Krishnan P. Hardin P. Amrein H. Nocturnal male sex drive in Drosophila.Curr. Biol. 2007; 17: 244-251Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (58) Google Scholar). And finally, the means by which thousands of honey bees select a nest site shares common themes with group decision making in humans. Clearly, simple animals show interesting and relevant social behaviors. Biological factors that influence social behaviors are similar to those that influence individual behaviors. Genetic contributions to social behavior involve the encoding of molecules with important structural and functional roles in the tissues (e.g., the brain) that influence behavior. Behavior is also strongly influenced by the environment, which has profound effects on development and physiological function. The environment can also act directly on the genome to change both the abundance and spatiotemporal expression pattern of molecules that influence behavior (Robinson et al., 2008Robinson G.E. Fernald R.D. Clayton D.F. Genes and social behavior.Science. 2008; 322: 896-900Crossref PubMed Scopus (195) Google Scholar). Thus, variation in social behavior within and between individuals arises from interdependencies between genes and the environment. Additionally, epigenetics may be particularly relevant for social behavior, as it provides a mechanism through which the consequences of experience are passed along to shape patterns of gene transcription without affecting genotype (reviewed in Bird, 2007Bird A. Perceptions of epigenetics.Nature. 2007; 447: 396-398Crossref PubMed Scopus (796) Google Scholar). The recent discovery of epigenetic processes in simple animals makes it possible to study the extent of epigenetic patterning and its “inheritance” in organisms where the genome and epigenome can be easily manipulated (Lyko et al., 2000Lyko F. Ramsahoye B.H. Jaenisch R. DNA methylation in Drosophila melanogaster.Nature. 2000; 408: 538-540Crossref PubMed Scopus (245) Google Scholar, Kronforst et al., 2008Kronforst M.R. Gilley D.C. Strassmann J.E. Queller D.C. DNA methylation is widespread across social Hymenoptera.Curr. Biol. 2008; 18: R287-R288Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (45) Google Scholar). While the role of epigenetics in social behavior across species is yet to be determined, simple model organisms allow us to address this question under a variety of social contexts. While simple animals have smaller brains and behavioral repertoires, they are still able to exhibit plastic responses to the environment. Their behaviors are not hard wired! Drosophila and honey bees show learning and memory and attention-like processes (van Swinderen and Greenspan, 2003van Swinderen B. Greenspan R.J. Salience modulates 20-30 Hz brain activity in Drosophila.Nat. Neurosci. 2003; 6: 579-586Crossref PubMed Scopus (88) Google Scholar) and use social learning in their every day lives (Chittka and Niven, 2009Chittka L. Niven J. Are bigger brains better?.Curr. Biol. 2009; 19: R995-R1008Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (134) Google Scholar). Like mammals (Cacioppo and Hawkley, 2009Cacioppo J.T. Hawkley L.C. Perceived social isolation and cognition.Trends Cogn. Sci. 2009; 13: 447-454Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (105) Google Scholar), simple animals are affected by social isolation. Isolating C. elegans during development reduces the behavioral response to touch, slows development, and alters neuronal connectivity (Rose et al., 2005Rose J.K. Sangha S. Rai S. Norman K.R. Rankin C.H. Decreased sensory stimulation reduces behavioral responding, retards development, and alters neuronal connectivity in Caenorhabditis elegans.J. Neurosci. 2005; 25: 7159-7168Crossref PubMed Scopus (27) Google Scholar). Social isolation in Drosophila reduces lifespan (Ruan and Wu, 2008Ruan H. Wu C.-F. Social interaction-mediated lifespan extension of Drosophila Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase mutants.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2008; 105: 7506-7510Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar), increases aggression (Hoffmann, 1990Hoffmann A.A. The influence of age and experience with conspecifics on territorial behaviour in Drosophila melanogaster.J. Insect Behav. 1990; 3: 1-12Crossref Scopus (29) Google Scholar, Zhou et al., 2008Zhou C. Rao Y. Rao Y. A subset of octopaminergic neurons are important for Drosophila aggression.Nat. Neurosci. 2008; 11: 1059-1067Crossref PubMed Scopus (68) Google Scholar), reduces the need for sleep (Ganguly-Fitzgerald et al., 2006Ganguly-Fitzgerald I. Donlea J. Shaw P.J. Waking experience affects sleep need in Drosophila.Science. 2006; 313: 1775-1781Crossref PubMed Scopus (101) Google Scholar, Donlea and Shaw, 2009Donlea J.M. Shaw P.J. Sleeping together using social interactions to understand the role of sleep in plasticity.Adv. Genet. 2009; 68: 57-81Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar), and decreases fiber number in the mushroom bodies, the functional equivalent to the mammalian hippocampus (Technau, 2007Technau G.M. Fiber number in the mushroom bodies of adult Drosophila melanogaster depends on age, sex and experience.J. Neurogenet. 2007; 21: 183-196Crossref PubMed Scopus (10) Google Scholar). Social isolation also reduces mushroom body volume in honey bees (Maleszka et al., 2009Maleszka J. Barron A.B. Helliwell P.G. Maleszka R. Effect of age, behaviour and social environment on honey bee brain plasticity.J. Comp. Physiol. [A]. 2009; 195: 733-740Crossref PubMed Scopus (26) Google Scholar). Although rarely studied in simple animals, critical periods during development may also be important for the development of normal social behavior (but see Rai and Rankin, 2007Rai S. Rankin C.H. Critical and sensitive periods for reversing the effects of mechanosensory deprivation on behavior, nervous system, and development in Caenorhabditis elegans.Dev. Neurobiol. 2007; 67: 1443-1456Crossref PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar, Svetec and Ferveur, 2005Svetec N. Ferveur J.F. Social experience and pheromonal perception can change male-male interactions in Drosophila melanogaster.J. Exp. Biol. 2005; 208: 891-898Crossref PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar). Another final factor to consider is the evolutionary consequences of social behavior. The theory of indirect genes states that variation in phenotype is shaped by social experience and that this has consequences for population allelic frequencies (Moore et al., 1997Moore A.J. Brodie III, E.D. Wolf J.B. Interacting phenotypes and the evolutionary process I. Direct and indirect genetic effects of social interactions.Evolution. 1997; 51: 1352-1362Crossref Google Scholar, Wolf et al., 1998Wolf J.B. Brodie III, E.D. Cheverud J.M. Moore A.J. Wade M.J. Evolutionary consequences of indirect genetic effects.Trends Ecol. Evol. 1998; 13: 64-69Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (360) Google Scholar). In doing so, it partitions the variation in phenotype by genotype, physical environment, social environment, and their interactions. The division of the environmental variable into physical and social components is the important part of the theory, and it provides a quantitative measure of the social component of phenotypic variation. Demonstration of indirect genetic effects have been shown in the fire ant (Ross and Keller, 1998Ross K.G. Keller L. Genetic control of social organization in an ant.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1998; 95: 14232-14237Crossref PubMed Scopus (103) Google Scholar, Ross and Keller, 2002Ross K.G. Keller L. Experimental conversion of colony social organization by manipulation of worker genotype composition in fire ants (Solenopsis invicta).Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2002; 51: 287-295Crossref Scopus (38) Google Scholar), the fruit fly (Petfield et al., 2005Petfield D. Chenoweth S.F. Rundle H.D. Blows M.W. Genetic variance in female condition predicts indirect genetic variance in male sexual display traits.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2005; 102: 6045-6050Crossref PubMed Scopus (71) Google Scholar, Kent et al., 2008Kent C. Azanchi R. Smith B. Formosa A. Levine J.D. Social context influences chemical communication in D. melanogaster males.Curr. Biol. 2008; 18: 1384-1389Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (71) Google Scholar), and the honey bee (Linksvayer et al., 2009Linksvayer T.A. Fondrk M.K. Page Jr., R.E. Honeybee social regulatory networks are shaped by colony-level selection.Am. Nat. 2009; 173: E99-E107Crossref PubMed Scopus (29) Google Scholar); however, a link to changes in allele frequency has not been established. Species comparisons provide a panoramic view of social behavior, enabling us to uncover common themes. Here, I discuss how studies of simple model organisms, with their easy-to-manipulate genes, genomes, and nervous systems, can provide insight into mechanisms involved in social behavior both within and between species. This paper is not meant to provide an exhaustive review of research on social behavior in simple animals and its history. Rather, I have selected illustrative examples of behaviors that have parallels in more complex animals to give the readers a flavor of some of the recent research in the field, and unfortunately, many excellent papers are not discussed here. There are many unanswered questions about social behavior. Does social behavior differ from individual behavior at the mechanistic level? Is there a “social brain” that is common to all social species? Do social behaviors have distinct signatures in the brain or the genome? Are social cues sensed, integrated, and processed differently than abiotic cues? Why are elements of social behavior conserved across species? Many of these questions await further development of the field of social behavior. The nematode C. elegans is highly amenable to behavior and neurogenetic analyses. Many behaviors have been studied in C. elegans, including response to touch and odors, heat sensitivity, feeding, locomotion, mating, learning, aggregation, and stress responses (reviewed in de Bono and Maricq, 2005de Bono M. Maricq A.V. Neuronal substrates of complex behaviors in C. elegans.Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2005; 28: 451-501Crossref PubMed Scopus (160) Google Scholar). Its genome has been sequenced, and a great number of mutants and transgenic lines have been generated. The molecular components of each neuron can be manipulated using targeted expression, individual neurons can be ablated or activated, and molecular expression levels can be manipulated with RNAi to address the importance of the molecule in the behavioral phenotype of interest. With genetic and molecular approaches, it is straightforward to determine the neurons involved in a particular behavior and their patterns of interaction, making C. elegans a superb model for neurogenetic analyses of behavior. Social Isolation. The presence of conspecific animals provides important sensory input for C. elegans (Rose et al., 2005Rose J.K. Sangha S. Rai S. Norman K.R. Rankin C.H. Decreased sensory stimulation reduces behavioral responding, retards development, and alters neuronal connectivity in Caenorhabditis elegans.J. Neurosci. 2005; 25: 7159-7168Crossref PubMed Scopus (27) Google Scholar). The responses to social isolation are influenced by glr-1, a glutamate receptor subunit gene that affects the development of normal behavior and the neurocircuitry used for transduction of mechanosensory stimulation, and egl-4, a cGMP-dependent protein kinase gene that affects body size. Mechanical stimulation of isolated worms restores normal mechanosensory behavior and circuitry but not body size, suggesting that development of normal body size requires the presence of other worms. Interestingly, there is a critical period in development whereby interactions between worms affect adult body size (Rai and Rankin, 2007Rai S. Rankin C.H. Critical and sensitive periods for reversing the effects of mechanosensory deprivation on behavior, nervous system, and development in Caenorhabditis elegans.Dev. Neurobiol. 2007; 67: 1443-1456Crossref PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar). Thus, social isolation during development can have multiple phenotypic effects on adult functions, some of which require sensory input during critical periods of development. Social Aggregation. Two C. elegans behaviors known to have a social component are male-female hermaphrodite mating (Srinivasan et al., 2008Srinivasan J. Kaplan F. Ajredini R. Zachariah C. Alborn H.T. Teal P.E.A. Malik R.U. Edison A.S. Sternberg P.W. Schroeder F.C. A blend of small molecules regulates both mating and development in Caenorhabditis elegans.Nature. 2008; 454: 1115-1118Crossref PubMed Scopus (107) Google Scholar, Liu and Sternberg, 1995Liu K.S. Sternberg P.W. Sensory regulation of male mating behavior in Caenorhabditis elegans.Neuron. 1995; 14: 79-89Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (159) Google Scholar) and aggregation behavior (de Bono and Bargmann, 1998de Bono M. Bargmann C.I. Natural variation in a neuropeptide Y receptor homolog modifies social behavior and food response in C. elegans.Cell. 1998; 94: 679-689Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (348) Google Scholar), both of which have naturally varying polymorphisms (Ardiel and Rankin, 2009Ardiel E.L. Rankin C.H. C. elegans: social interactions in a “nonsocial” animal.Adv. Genet. 2009; 68: 1-22Crossref PubMed Scopus (3) Google Scholar). Here, I discuss C. elegans aggregation behavior in more detail. Variation in the npr-1 gene accounts for what has been called social foraging behavior (de Bono and Bargmann, 1998de Bono M. Bargmann C.I. Natural variation in a neuropeptide Y receptor homolog modifies social behavior and food response in C. elegans.Cell. 1998; 94: 679-689Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (348) Google Scholar). Interestingly, recent work has suggested that variation in npr-1 arose in the same strain background, suggesting that it may have arisen as a laboratory mutation (McGrath et al., 2009McGrath P.T. Rockman M.V. Zimmer M. Jang H. Macosko E.Z. Kruglyak L. Bargmann C.I. Quantitative mapping of a digenic behavioral trait implicates globin variation in C. elegans sensory behaviors.Neuron. 2009; 61: 692-699Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (73) Google Scholar). While feeding on a bacterial lawn, social worms aggregate, forming clumps at the border of the food and exhibit rapid locomotion, whereas solitary worms feed alone (Figure 1A ). The difference between social and solitary strains arises from a single amino acid change in the npr-1 gene, which encodes a receptor with similarity to the members of the mammalian neuropeptide Y receptor family (reviewed in de Bono and Sokolowski, 2007de Bono M. Sokolowski M.B. Foraging in flies and worms.in: North G. Greenspan R.J. Invertebrate Neurobiology. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY2007: 437-466Google Scholar). Social strains have a lower activity form of NPR-1 than solitary ones, and null mutants are hypersocial. NPR-1 is expressed mainly in neurons, where it localizes to cell bodies, axons, and dendrites (Coates and de Bono, 2002Coates J.C. de Bono M. Antagonistic pathways in neurons exposed to body fluid regulate social feeding in Caenorhabditis elegans.Nature. 2002; 419: 925-929Crossref PubMed Scopus (107) Google Scholar). Although NPR-1 is found in most developmental stages, manipulation of its temporal expression pattern indicates that it exerts an acute rather than developmental affect on aggregation behavior. Solitary worms disperse over a lawn of E. coli bacteria (A and C), whereas social worms aggregate and form clumps (B and D). Scale bars represent 2 mm in (A) and (B) and 2.5 mm in (C) and (D). Image is reprinted from de Bono and Bargmann, 1998de Bono M. Bargmann C.I. Natural variation in a neuropeptide Y receptor homolog modifies social behavior and food response in C. elegans.Cell. 1998; 94: 679-689Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (348) Google Scholar. (E) A hub and spoke circuit diagram of neurons with gap junctions to RMG; stimuli detected by sensory neurons are shown when known as well as the names of genes that are expressed in these neurons. For further information, see text. Modified from Ardiel and Rankin, 2009Ardiel E.L. Rankin C.H. C. elegans: social interactions in a “nonsocial” animal.Adv. Genet. 2009; 68: 1-22Crossref PubMed Scopus (3) Google Scholar, who adapted it from Macosko et al., 2009Macosko E.Z. Pokala N. Feinberg E.H. Chalasani S.H. Butcher R.A. Clardy J. Bargmann C.I. A hub-and-spoke circuit drives pheromone attraction and social behaviour in C. elegans.Nature. 2009; 458: 1171-1175Crossref PubMed Scopus (134) Google Scholar. But is aggregation behavior due to interactions between individuals, or do social worms prefer to aggregate around particular abiotic factors (e.g., reduced oxygen levels) more so than the solitary worms? The answer is yes to both questions. Atypical soluble guanyl cyclases (sGCs), which are thought to act as oxygen sensors, interact with npr-1 (Gray et al., 2004Gray J.M. Karow D.S. Lu H. Chang A.J. Chang J.S. Ellis R.E. Marletta M.A. Bargmann C.I. Oxygen sensation and social feeding mediated by a C. elegans guanylate cyclase homologue.Nature. 2004; 430: 317-322Crossref PubMed Scopus (242) Google Scholar, Cheung et al., 2005Cheung B.H. Cohen M. Rogers C. Albayram O. de Bono M. Experience-dependent modulation of C. elegans behavior by ambient oxygen.Curr. Biol. 2005; 15: 905-917Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (92) Google Scholar, Persson et al., 2009Persson A. Gross E. Laurent P. Busch K.E. Bretes H. de Bono M. Natural variation in a neural globin tunes oxygen sensing in wild Caenorhabditis elegans.Nature. 2009; 458: 1030-1033Crossref PubMed Scopus (44) Google Scholar, Zimmer et al., 2009Zimmer M. Gray J.M. Pokala N. Chang A.J. Karow D.S. Marletta M.A. Hudson M.L. Morton D.B. Chronis N. Bargmann C.I. Neurons detect increases and decreases in oxygen levels using distinct guanylate cyclases.Neuron. 2009; 61: 865-879Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (71) Google Scholar). Mutations in these sGCs and reductions in ambient oxygen suppress aggregation and bordering behavior in social worms (Cheung et al., 2004Cheung B.H. Arellano-Carbajal F. Rybicki I. de Bono M. Soluble guanylate cyclases act in neurons exposed to the body fluid to promote C. elegans aggregation behavior.Curr. Biol. 2004; 14: 1105-1111Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (74) Google Scholar, Gray et al., 2004Gray J.M. Karow D.S. Lu H. Chang A.J. Chang J.S. Ellis R.E. Marletta M.A. Bargmann C.I. Oxygen sensation and social feeding mediated by a C. elegans guanylate cyclase homologue.Nature. 2004; 430: 317-322Crossref PubMed Scopus (242) Google Scholar). Rogers et al., 2006Rogers C. Persson A. Cheung B. de Bono M. Behavioral motifs and neural pathways coordinating O2 responses and aggregation in C. elegans.Curr. Biol. 2006; 16: 649-659Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (50) Google Scholar suggest that anterior and posterior oxygen sensors mediate aggregation behavior by responding to the rise in oxygen levels as the worm moves away from the aggregate. These results suggest that the aggregation behavior is a response to oxygen levels and, therefore, is not a social behavior according to our definition. However, the discovery of C. elegans mating pheromones suggests that chemical communication can influence behavior (Srinivasan et al., 2008Srinivasan J. Kaplan F. Ajredini R. Zachariah C. Alborn H.T. Teal P.E.A. Malik R.U. Edison A.S. Sternberg P.W. Schroeder F.C. A blend of small molecules regulates both mating and development in Caenorhabditis elegans.Nature. 2008; 454: 1115-1118Crossref PubMed Scopus (107) Google Scholar). In a study assessing the role of pheromonal communication in aggregation behavior, Macosko et al., 2009Macosko E.Z. Pokala N. Feinberg E.H. Chalasani S.H. Butcher R.A. Clardy J. Bargmann C.I. A hub-and-spoke circuit drives pheromone attraction and social behaviour in C. elegans.Nature. 2009; 458: 1171-1175Crossref PubMed Scopus (134) Google Scholar showed that aggregation involves direct responses to other animals and not just a shared preference for environments with low oxygen levels. Solitary animals are repelled by ascaroside pheromones produced by other animals, whereas social animals are attracted to them. They also discovered that the RMG inter/motor neuron acts as a hub of integration for the diverse cues known to affect social behavior. Low npr-1 activity in RMG correlates with social behavior, while high npr-1 activity is associated with solitary behavior. High RMG activity is necessary for all components of social behavior. Their model (Figure 1E) proposes that distributed sensory inputs coordinated through gap junctions via connections with RMG produce particular synaptic outputs affecting C. elegans movement patterns. High RMG activity increases social aggregation and the response of the ASK sensory neuron to ascarosides. ASK activity is reduced by high levels of NPR-1 activity. This work identifies an anatomical circuit underlying social behavior and suggests that npr-1 changes the properties of the circuit by modulating RMG neuron activity. The involvement of a single class of pheromones in multiple complex behaviors raises a number of questions. How do these pheromones differentially affect mating, social aggregation, and dauer formation? How is this regulated at the molecular level and through what circuitry? Drosophila has recently emerged as model for studies of social behavior, and although there is not yet any clear conceptual framework that integrates the results of this work, it is clear that this research will provide genetic and molecular insights that translate to investigations of social behavior in other species. And for many of us, there is much pleasure in understanding the workings of the fly itself. Drosophila has a broader set of social behaviors than C. elegans, presumably because of its more complex nervous system and its more complex physical and social environments (Reaume and Sokolowski, 2006Reaume C.J. Sokolowski M.B. The nature of Drosophila melanogaster.Curr. Biol. 2006; 16: R623-R628Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar). Drosophila's long history as a genetic model, along with its cadre of genome resources, makes it an ideal organism to identify genes and molecules involved in normal social behavior. Transgenic manipulation of nervous system function further facilitates the identification of brain structures and neural circuits important for social behavior. Given the feasibility of generating genetic mutants in any phenotype of interest, I expect that researchers will soon undertake genetic screens for mutants that disrupt or enhance social behavior. Drosophila has a tremendous tool kit for neurogenetic analysis of social behavior, and much of its genome is covered by deletion and insertional mutants and a library of RNAi lines (Dietzl et al., 2007Dietzl G. Chen D. Schnorrer F. Su K.-C. Barinova Y. Fellner M. Gasser B. Kinsey K. Oppel S. Scheiblauer S. et al.A genome-wide transgenic RNAi library for conditional gene inactivation in Drosophila.Nature. 2007; 448: 151-156Crossref PubMed Scopus (1007) Google Scholar). Additionally, targeted expression of a gene to a cell, tissue, or group of tissues is possible, allowing for manipulation of cells and circuitry (Brand and Perrimon, 1993Brand A.H. Perrimon N. Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes.Development. 1993; 118: 401-415Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, Venken and Bellen, 2005Venken K.J. Bellen H.J. Emerging technologies for gene manipulation in Drosophila melanogaster.Nat. Rev. Genet. 2005; 6: 167-178Crossref PubMed Scopus (110) Google Scholar). Optogenetic approaches have been utilized in flies, allowing precise spatial and temporal manipulation of neural activity in behaving flies (Miesenböck, 2009Miesenböck G. The optogenetic catechism.Science. 2009; 326: 395-399Crossref PubMed Scopus (94) Google Scholar). Natural genetic variation for behavior can also be an excellent resource for identifying genes (de Belle and Sokolowski, 1987de Belle J.S. Sokolowski M.B. Heredity of rover/sitter: Alternative foraging strategies of Drosophila melanogaster.Heredity. 1987; 59: 73-83Crossref Google Scholar, de Belle et al., 1989de Belle J.S. Hilliker A.J. Sokolowski M.B. Genetic localization of foraging (for): a major gene for larval behavior in Drosophila melanogaster.Genetics. 1989; 123: 157-163PubMed Google Scholar, Dierick and Greenspan, 2006Dierick H.A. Greenspan R.J. Molecular analysis of flies selected for aggressive behavior.Nat. Genet. 2006; 38: 1023-1031Crossref PubMed Scopus (101) Google Scholar, Edwards et al., 2006Edwards A.C. Rollmann S.M. Morgan T.J. Mackay T.F.C. Quantitative genomics of aggressive behaviour in Drosophila melanogaster.PLoS Genet. 2006; 2: 1386-1395Crossref Scopus (53) Google Scholar). Genome sequence" @default.
• W2030837504 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2030837504 creator A5054041436 @default.
• W2030837504 date "2010-03-01" @default.
• W2030837504 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2030837504 title "Social Interactions in “Simple” Model Systems" @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1481867552 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1501652874 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W151757727 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1566523260 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1927144750 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1927847453 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1963599022 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1966925015 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1968448459 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1970497442 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1971079677 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1976354663 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1977337163 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1977917568 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1980387611 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1980403687 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1982009673 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1986830998 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1987381365 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1989783465 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1990775620 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1992599919 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1994713392 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1996818651 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1997642725 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1998038483 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1998335103 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W1999478182 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2000805219 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2000852484 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2002141216 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2004033705 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2004133672 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2004477171 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2004788565 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2004794537 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2005604472 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2006565573 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2011558033 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2013409472 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2014605680 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2017201559 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2018676673 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2020995078 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2022298513 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2026059246 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2029496968 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2032176996 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2032690880 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2033865803 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2034630241 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2035004424 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2036416171 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2037931846 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2039423778 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2039941639 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2040131430 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2044189017 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2044401234 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2046803788 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2046856562 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2047195564 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2049174326 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2052986082 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2061309502 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2064197376 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2064296221 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2064401954 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2064617100 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2065624887 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2065703635 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2067205065 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2067218310 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2068307424 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2068487166 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2070217895 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2072003932 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2072511595 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2074875166 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2077499935 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2079972130 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2087133124 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2089049622 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2091825427 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2092339273 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2097233732 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2099536877 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2100081162 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2100539697 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2100849159 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2104569765 @default.
• W2030837504 cites W2105174770 @default.

• next