Letter | Published:

Dynamic sensory cues shape song structure in Drosophila

Nature volume 507, pages 233237 (13 March 2014) | Download Citation


The generation of acoustic communication signals is widespread across the animal kingdom1,2, and males of many species, including Drosophilidae, produce patterned courtship songs to increase their chance of success with a female. For some animals, song structure can vary considerably from one rendition to the next3; neural noise within pattern generating circuits is widely assumed to be the primary source of such variability, and statistical models that incorporate neural noise are successful at reproducing the full variation present in natural songs4. In direct contrast, here we demonstrate that much of the pattern variability in Drosophila courtship song can be explained by taking into account the dynamic sensory experience of the male. In particular, using a quantitative behavioural assay combined with computational modelling, we find that males use fast modulations in visual and self-motion signals to pattern their songs, a relationship that we show is evolutionarily conserved. Using neural circuit manipulations, we also identify the pathways involved in song patterning choices and show that females are sensitive to song features. Our data not only demonstrate that Drosophila song production is not a fixed action pattern5,6, but establish Drosophila as a valuable new model for studies of rapid decision-making under both social and naturalistic conditions.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1.

    & Birdsong and human speech: common themes and mechanisms. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 22, 567–631 (1999)

  2. 2.

    & The neurobiology of cricket song. Sci. Am. 231, 34–50 (1974)

  3. 3.

    & Online contributions of auditory feedback to neural activity in avian song control circuitry. J. Neurosci. 28, 11378–11390 (2008)

  4. 4.

    & A compact statistical model of the song syntax in Bengalese finch. PLoS Comput. Biol. 7, e1001108 (2011)

  5. 5.

    The mating of a fly. Science 264, 1702–1714 (1994)

  6. 6.

    & fruitless splicing specifies male courtship behavior in Drosophila. Cell 121, 785–794 (2005)

  7. 7.

    , & The smell of love in Drosophila. Front. Physiol. 4, 72 (2013)

  8. 8.

    The role of auditory stimuli in the courtship of Drosophila melanogaster. Anim. Behav. 24, 18–26 (1976)

  9. 9.

    & Pulse interval as a critical parameter in the courtship song of Drosophila melanogaster. Anim. Behav. 17, 755–759 (1969)

  10. 10.

    , & Are complex behaviors specified by dedicated regulatory genes? Reasoning from Drosophila. Cell 105, 13–24 (2001)

  11. 11.

    , & Improved classification images with sparse priors in a smooth basis. J. Vis. 9, (2009)

  12. 12.

    , , , & A generalized linear model for estimating spectrotemporal receptive fields from responses to natural sounds. PLoS ONE 6, e16104 (2011)

  13. 13.

    et al. Spatio-temporal correlations and visual signalling in a complete neuronal population. Nature 454, 995–999 (2008)

  14. 14.

    , & Analyzing neural responses to natural signals: maximally informative dimensions. Neural Comput. 16, 223–250 (2004)

  15. 15.

    , , & Song choice is modulated by female movement in Drosophila males. PLoS ONE 7, e46025 (2012)

  16. 16.

    , , & Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nature Neurosci. 11, 543–545 (2008)

  17. 17.

    et al. Different Kenyon cell populations drive learned approach and avoidance in Drosophila. Neuron 79, 945–956 (2013)

  18. 18.

    , , & A receptor that mediates the post-mating switch in Drosophila reproductive behaviour. Nature 451, 33–37 (2008)

  19. 19.

    Decision making in animals. Nature 269, 15–21 (1977)

  20. 20.

    & Real-time contributions of auditory feedback to avian vocal motor control. J. Neurosci. 26, 9619–9628 (2006)

  21. 21.

    , , , & Neural mechanisms for the coordination of duet singing in wrens. Science 334, 666–670 (2011)

  22. 22.

    The neuromuscular basis of courtship song in Drosophila: the role of the direct and axillary wing muscles. J. Comp. Physiol. 130, 87–93 (1979)

  23. 23.

    , & Motor control of Drosophila courtship song. Cell Rep. 5, 678–686 (2013)

  24. 24.

    , , & Two distinct modes of forebrain circuit dynamics underlie temporal patterning in the vocalizations of young songbirds. J. Neurosci. 31, 16353–16368 (2011)

  25. 25.

    Wired for sex: the neurobiology of Drosophila mating decisions. Science 322, 904–909 (2008)

  26. 26.

    , & Vocal experimentation in the juvenile songbird requires a basal ganglia circuit. PLoS Biol. 3, e153 (2005)

  27. 27.

    The Study of Instinct (Clarendon Press, 1951)

  28. 28.

    , , , & Discriminating external and internal causes for heading changes in freely flying Drosophila. PLoS Comput. Biol. 9, e1002891 (2013)

  29. 29.

    , , & Limits of predictability in human mobility. Science 327, 1018–1021 (2010)

  30. 30.

    , , , & Multi-channel acoustic recording and automated analysis of Drosophila courtship songs. BMC Biol. 11, 11 (2013)

  31. 31.

    , , & A receptor that mediates the post-mating switch in Drosophila reproductive behaviour. Nature 451, 33–37 (2008)

  32. 32.

    et al. SIFamide is a highly conserved neuropeptide: a comparative study in different insect species. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 320, 334–341 (2004)

  33. 33.

    & A new chamber for studying the behavior of Drosophila. PLoS ONE 5, e8793 (2010)

  34. 34.

    , , & Efficient multiple object tracking using mutually repulsive active membranes. PLoS ONE 8, e65769 (2013)

  35. 35.

    et al. Drosophila auditory organ genes and genetic hearing defects. Cell 150, 1042–1054 (2012)

Download references


We thank B. Arthur and D. Stern for assistance in establishing the song recording system; P. Andolfatto for wild-type fly strains; S. Kamal and V. Cheng for assistance with selecting and maintaining fly strains; G. Guan for technical assistance; T. Tayler for help with injections; J. Shaevitz for help with the fly tracker; R. da Silveira for early discussions on reverse correlation; and G. Laurent, C. Brody, D. Aronov, I. Fiete, M. Ryan, and the entire Murthy lab for thoughtful feedback and comments on the manuscript. Figure 1a was illustrated by K. Ris-Vicari. P.C. is funded by an HHMI International Predoctoral Fellowship and M.M. is funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Human Frontiers Science Program, an NSF CAREER award, the McKnight Endowment Fund, and the Klingenstein Foundation.

Author information

Author notes

    • Yi Deng

    Present address: Department of Biophysics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA.


  1. Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, USA

    • Philip Coen
    • , Jan Clemens
    • , Andrew J. Weinstein
    • , Diego A. Pacheco
    •  & Mala Murthy
  2. Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, USA

    • Philip Coen
    • , Jan Clemens
    • , Andrew J. Weinstein
    • , Diego A. Pacheco
    •  & Mala Murthy
  3. Department of Physics, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, USA

    • Yi Deng


  1. Search for Philip Coen in:

  2. Search for Jan Clemens in:

  3. Search for Andrew J. Weinstein in:

  4. Search for Diego A. Pacheco in:

  5. Search for Yi Deng in:

  6. Search for Mala Murthy in:


P.C. and M.M. designed the study. P.C., A.J.W. and D.A.P. collected and processed the data. Y.D. developed the fly tracking algorithm. P.C. and J.C. analysed the data. P.C. and M.M. wrote the paper.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mala Murthy.

Extended data

Supplementary information


  1. 1.

    Tracking of flies in the behavioural chamber

    The video shows two flies (WT1 male (grey) and PIBL female (magenta)) interacting in the behavioural chamber, and tracked with our software. Male and female centres are indicated by the larger circles. Dots mark 3 positions along the body axis, with head direction indicated by the larger circles. Lines indicate 3 seconds of tracking history for each fly.

About this article

Publication history






Further reading


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.