Cited by 267Neurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchInsect Pheromone Research and ControlInsect behavior and control techniques

Olfactory shifts parallel superspecialism for toxic fruit in Drosophila melanogaster sibling, D. sechellia

Open access
Dekker, Teun, Ibba, Irene, Siju, K.P., Stensmyr, Marcus C., Hansson, Bill S.·2006·Current Biology

Abstract

Olfaction in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster is increasingly understood, from ligand-receptor-neuron combinations to their axonal projection patterns into the antennal lobe . Drosophila thus offers an excellent opportunity to study the evolutionary and ecological dynamics of olfactory systems. We compared the structure and function of the generalist D. melanogaster with that of specialist D. sechellia, which oviposits exclusively on morinda fruit . Our analyses show that whereas the fruit's headspace was dominated by acids, antennae responded most strongly to hexanoates. D. sechellia exhibited an extraordinarily strong response to methyl hexanoate (MeHex). Behaviorally, D. sechellia was much more attracted to these morinda fruit volatiles than was D. melanogaster. The high sensitivity to MeHex was paralleled by a 2.5x-3 x overrepresentation of MeHex neurons on the antenna and a concordant 2.9 x increase in volume of the corresponding glomerulus as compared to D. melanogaster. In addition, the MeHex neuron exhibited an extreme sensitivity down to femtograms of its ligand. In contrast, no peripherally mediated shift was found paralleling D. sechellia's increased attraction to acids. These findings are a demonstration of evolution acting at several levels in the olfactory circuitry in mediating a fruit fly's unique preference for fruit toxic to its sibling species .

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2005.11.075

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Total neuron number can change if alterations in the developmental programme affect the division of neuronal progenitors, leading to the duplication or elimination of certain neurons.

    “For example, total neuron number can change if alterations in the developmental programme affect the division of neuronal progenitors, leading to the duplication or elimination of certain neurons [18].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 44 · Cited by 267

Authors
Dekker, T., Ibba, I., Siju, K. P., Stensmyr, M. C., & Hansson, B. S.
Affiliations
  • Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
Corresponding author
Dekker, Teun
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
101-109
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2015249343
Cited by
267
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 14
FWCI
4.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Marie Curie
  • Vetenskapsrådet
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect Pheromone Research and Control
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect behavior and control techniques
Keywords
olfactory evolution, Drosophila sechellia, Drosophila melanogaster, methyl hexanoate, hexanoic acid, olfactory glomeruli, olfactory sensitivity, oviposition behavior, host plant preference
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Amino Acid Sequence, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Caproates, Drosophila melanogaster, Fruit, Molecular Sequence Data, Olfactory Pathways, Phylogeny, Smell, Species Specificity, Sequence Alignment, Sequence Homology, Amino Acid, Olfactory Receptor Neurons, Receptors, Odorant, Drosophila Proteins, Morinda

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review