Neural circuit evolved to process pheromone differently in two species of fruit fly

Gompel, Nicolas; Prud’homme, Benjamin

doi:10.1038/d41586-018-05595-y

NEWS AND VIEWS
11 July 2018

Neural circuit evolved to process pheromone differently in two species of fruit fly

The males of two closely related species of fly respond differently to a female pheromone. It emerges that this difference is due to alterations in the activity of an evolutionarily conserved neural circuit in the brain.

Nicolas Gompel⁰ &
Benjamin Prud’homme¹

Nicolas Gompel
1. Nicolas Gompel is in the Faculty of Biology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, Germany.
View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Benjamin Prud’homme
1. Benjamin Prud’homme is at the Aix-Marseille University, CNRS, Developmental Biology Institute of Marseille (IBDM), 13288 Marseille, France.
View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Access through your institution

Buy or subscribe

Particular sensory signals — a certain odour or taste, for instance — can trigger opposing responses in different species. What changes in neural circuits could elicit such contradictory behaviours? In a paper in Nature, Seeholzer et al.¹ compare the circuits that control courtship in males in two closely related species of fruit fly that behave differently when exposed to a particular pheromone. They find an explanation for these opposing behaviours that few neuroscientists would have predicted.

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

Buy

All prices are NET prices.

Nature 559, 485-487 (2018)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05595-y

References

Seeholzer, L. F., Seppo, M., Stern, D. L. & Ruta, V. Nature 559, 564–569 (2018).
Article Google Scholar
Billeter, J. C., Atallah, J., Krupp, J. J., Millar, J. G. & Levine, J. D. Nature 461, 987–991 (2009).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Kimura, K., Hachiya, T., Koganezawa, M., Tazawa, T. & Yamamoto, D. Neuron 59, 759–769 (2008).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Clowney, E. J., Iguchi, S., Bussell, J. J., Scheer, E. & Ruta, V. Neuron 87, 1036–1049 (2015).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Schneiderman, A. M., Hildebrand, J. G., Brennan, M. M. & Tumlinson, J. H. Nature 323, 801–803 (1986).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
McGrath, P. T. et al. Nature 477, 321–325 (2011).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
McBride, C. S. et al. Nature 515, 222–227 (2014).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Prieto-Godino, L. L. et al. Nature 539, 93–97 (2016).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Karageorgi, M. et al. Curr. Biol. 27, 847–853 (2017).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Prieto-Godino, L. L. et al. Neuron 93, 661–676 (2017).
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Stern, D. L. & Orgogozo, V. Evolution 62, 2155–2177 (2008).
Article PubMed Google Scholar