CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 3Neurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchBiochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesIon Channels and Receptors

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evolution of taste processing shifts dietary preference

Open access
Bertolini, Enrico, Münch, Daniel, Pascual, Justine, Sgammeglia, Noemi, Ribeiro, Carlos, Auer, Thomas O.·2024·Nature
DOI 10.1101/2024.10.11.617601

Preprint — published as 10.1038/s41586-025-09766-6 · Paper page

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Food choice is an important driver of speciation and invasion of novel ecological niches. However, we know little about the mechanisms leading to changes in dietary preference. Here, we use the three closely-related species Drosophila sechellia , D. simulans and D. melanogaster to study taste circuit and food choice evolution. D. sechellia, a host specialist, feeds exclusively on a single fruit ( Morinda citrifolia , noni) - the latter two are generalists living on various substrates. Using quantitative feeding assays, we recapitulate the preference for noni in D. sechellia and detect conserved sweet but altered bitter sensitivity via calcium imaging in peripheral taste neurons. Noni surprisingly activates bitter sensing neurons more strongly in D. sechellia due to a small deletion in one single gustatory receptor. Using volumetric calcium imaging in the ventral brain, we show that instead of peripheral physiology, species-specific processing of noni and sugar signals in sensorimotor circuits recapitulates differences in dietary preference. Our data support that peripheral receptor changes alone cannot explain altered food choice but rather modifications in how sensory information is transformed into feeding motor commands.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2024.10.11.617601

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 89

  1. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.10.001 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1146/annurevento-020117-043331 · DOI
  3. 10.1038/nrg2480 · DOI
  4. 2024, Diversity and evolution of the vertebrate chemoreceptor gene repertoire, Nat Commun, 15, 1421, 10.1038/s41467-024-45500-y · DOI
  5. 10.1038/nature08696 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1371/journal.pgen.0010027 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1126/science.abf6505 · DOI
  8. 2022, Identification and expression profiles of gustatory receptor genes in Bactrocera minax larvae (Diptera: Tephritidae): Role of BminGR59f in larval growth, Insect Sci, 29, 1240, 10.1111/1744-7917.13014 · DOI
  9. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1009527 · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.cub.2014.12.058 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.01.001 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/j.cell.2016.02.061 · DOI
  13. Shiu, P. K. , Sterne, G. R. , Engert, S. , Dickson, B. J. & Scott, K . Taste quality and hunger interactions in a feeding sensorimotor circuit. Elife 11 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  14. McKellar, C. E. , Siwanowicz, I. , Dickson, B. J. & Simpson, J. H . Controlling motor neurons of every muscle for fly proboscis reaching. Elife 9 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  15. Sterne, G. R. , Otsuna, H. , Dickson, B. J. & Scott, K . Classification and genetic targeting of cell types in the primary taste and premotor center of the adult Drosophila brain. Elife 10 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1016/j.cub.2022.07.048 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1038/s41586-022-04909-5 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1016/j.cell.2020.12.014 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002432 · DOI
  20. Pelaez, J. N. , et al. Taste evolution in an herbivorous drosophilid. bioRxiv (2024). · DOI
  21. Auer, T. O. , Shahandeh, M. P. & Benton, R . Drosophila sechellia: A genetic model for behavioral evolution and neuroecology. Annu Rev Genet (2021). · DOI
  22. Wang, W. et al. Sugar sensation and mechanosensation in the egg-laying preference shift of Drosophila suzukii . Elife 11 (2022). · DOI
  23. Dweck, H. K. , Talross, G. J. , Wang, W. & Carlson, J. R . Evolutionary shifts in taste coding in the fruit pest Drosophila suzukii . Elife 10 (2021). · DOI
  24. 10.1016/j.cub.2019.11.005 · DOI
  25. 2023, Evolution of fatty acid taste in drosophilids, Cell Rep, 42, 113297, 10.1016/j.celrep.2023.113297 · DOI
  26. Reisenman, C. E. , Wong, J. , Vedagarbha, N. , Livelo, C. & Scott, K . Taste adaptations associated with host specialization in the specialist Drosophila sechellia . J Exp Biol 226 (2023). · DOI
  27. 10.1073/pnas.0608424104 · DOI
  28. 10.1534/genetics.107.078683 · DOI
  29. 2007, Odorant-binding proteins OBP57d and OBP57e affect taste perception and host-plant preference in Drosophila sechellia, Plos Biol, 5, 985
  30. 10.1038/s41586-020-2073-7 · DOI
  31. 10.1038/ncomms3042 · DOI
  32. 10.1038/ncomms5560 · DOI
  33. 10.1038/s41467-023-38722-z · DOI
  34. McLaughlin, C. N. et al. Single-cell transcriptomes of developing and adult olfactory receptor neurons in Drosophila . Elife 10 (2021). · DOI
  35. 2019, Interspecies comparative analyses reveal distinct carbohydrate-responsive systems among Drosophila species, Cell Rep, 28, 2594, 10.1016/j.celrep.2019.08.030 · DOI
  36. Abe, M. et al. Shortened lifespan induced by a high-glucose diet is associated with intestinal immune dysfunction in Drosophila sechellia. J Exp Biol 225 (2022). · DOI
  37. Melvin, R. G. et al. Natural variation in sugar tolerance associates with changes in signaling and mitochondrial ribosome biogenesis. Elife 7 (2018). · DOI
  38. Steck, K. et al. Internal amino acid state modulates yeast taste neurons to support protein homeostasis in Drosophila . Elife 7 (2018). · DOI
  39. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.21-05-01523.2001 · DOI
  40. 10.1016/j.cell.2012.03.045 · DOI
  41. 10.1038/nature09011 · DOI
  42. Jaeger, A. H. et al. A complex peripheral code for salt taste in Drosophila . Elife 7 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.11.042 · DOI
  44. 10.1038/s41467-018-06453-1 · DOI
  45. Task, D. et al. Chemoreceptor co-expression in Drosophila melanogaster olfactory neurons. Elife 11 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  46. 2022, Studies related to the chemical composition, biological activities and toxicity of methanolic extracts of noni (Morinda citrifolia) fruits and leaves, Nat Prod Res, 36, 5868, 10.1080/14786419.2021.2021199 · DOI
  47. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006599 · DOI
  48. Ikeda, R. , Wada, M. , Nishigaki, T. & Nakashima, K . Quantification of coumarin derivatives in noni (Morinda citrifolia) and their contribution of quenching effect on reactive oxygen species. Food Chemistry 113 (2009). · DOI
  49. 10.14348/molcells.2016.2250 · DOI
  50. Ahn, J. E. , Chen, Y. & Amrein, H . Molecular basis of fatty acid taste in Drosophila . Elife 6 (2017). · DOI
  51. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0649-14.2014 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.cub.2021.10.020 · DOI
  53. 10.1073/pnas.0811744106 · DOI
  54. 10.1016/j.cub.2009.07.061 · DOI
  55. 10.1007/s10519-011-9461-6 · DOI
  56. 10.1371/journal.pone.0001513 · DOI
  57. 2024, Structure basis for sugar specificity of gustatory receptors in insects, Cell Discov, 10, 83, 10.1038/s41421-024-00716-6 · DOI
  58. 10.1038/s41586-024-07255-w · DOI
  59. 10.1126/science.adj2609 · DOI
  60. 2024, Structural basis of ligand specificity and channel activation in an insect gustatory receptor, Cell Rep, 43, 114035, 10.1016/j.celrep.2024.114035 · DOI
  61. 2024, Evolution of connectivity architecture in the Drosophila mushroom body, Nat Commun, 15, 4872, 10.1038/s41467-024-48839-4 · DOI
  62. Gonzalez Segarra, A. J. , Pontes, G. , Jourjine, N. , Del Toro, A. & Scott, K. Hunger- and thirst-sensing neurons modulate a neuroendocrine network to coordinate sugar and water ingestion. Elife 12 (2023). · DOI
  63. Schlegel, P. et al. Information flow, cell types and stereotypy in a full olfactory connectome. Elife 10 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  64. 2023, Molecular basis of hexanoic acid taste in Drosophila melanogaster, Mol Cells, 46, 451, 10.14348/molcells.2023.0035 · DOI
  65. Prieto-Godino, L. L. , Schmidt, H. R. & Benton, R . Molecular reconstruction of recurrent evolutionary switching in olfactory receptor specificity. Elife 10 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  66. 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.12.032 · DOI · Paper page
  67. 10.1016/j.cub.2014.07.020 · DOI · Paper page
  68. 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.09.032 · DOI · Paper page
  69. 2016, Starvation-induced depotentiation of bitter taste in Drosophila, Chem Senses, 41, E116
  70. 10.1016/j.cell.2012.10.024 · DOI
  71. Cui, X. , Meiselman, M. R. , Thornton, S. N. & Yapici, N. A gut-brain-gut interoceptive circuit loop gates sugar ingestion in Drosophila . bioRxiv, 2024.2009.2002.610892 (2024). · DOI
  72. 2020, Cellular metabolic reprogramming controls sugar appetite in Drosophila, Nat Metab, 2, 958, 10.1038/s42255-020-0266-x · DOI
  73. 10.1038/nmeth.1561 · DOI
  74. 10.1534/genetics.113.160713 · DOI
  75. 10.1073/pnas.1405500111 · DOI · Paper page
  76. 10.1073/pnas.0611511104 · DOI
  77. 2017, A mechanosensory receptor required for food texture detection in Drosophila, Nat Commun, 8, 14192, 10.1038/ncomms14192 · DOI
  78. 10.1038/nmeth.2019 · DOI · Paper page
  79. 10.1016/j.cub.2010.07.045 · DOI · Paper page
  80. 10.1016/j.cub.2010.03.061 · DOI
  81. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015 · DOI · Paper page
  82. 10.1038/S41592-022-01488-1 · DOI · Paper page
  83. 10.1126/science.abk2432 · DOI
  84. 2019, Welcome to the tidyverse, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1686, 10.21105/joss.01686 · DOI · Paper page
  85. 10.1038/nature14024 · DOI
  86. 10.1016/S0960-9822(01)00258-5 · DOI
  87. Dürr, B. R. et al. Olfactory projection neuron rewiring in the brain of an ecological specialist. bioRxiv, 2024.2007.2026.605288 (2024). · DOI
  88. 10.1534/g3.116.038885 · DOI
  89. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3363-11.2011 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Bertolini, E., Münch, D., Pascual, J., Sgammeglia, N., Ribeiro, C., & Auer, T. O.
Affiliations
  • University of Fribourg (CH)
  • Champalimaud Foundation (PT)
Corresponding author
Auer, Thomas O.
ORCID
Venue
Nature
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2024-10-12
Volume
649
Issue
8097
Pages
657-666
ISSN
0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1101/2024.10.11.617601
OpenAlex
W4416716987
Cited by
3
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • FreiDok plus (Universitätsbibliothek Freiburg) (submittedVersion)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Ion Channels and Receptors
Keywords
taste processing, food preferences, Drosophila sechellia, Drosophila simulans, Drosophila melanogaster, Morinda citrifolia, host specialization, sensorimotor circuits, calcium imaging, taste neurons, feeding behavior
MeSH terms
Drosophila simulans, Animals, Brain, Calcium, Diet, Drosophila, Drosophila melanogaster, Biological Evolution, Feeding Behavior, Female, Food Preferences, Fruit, Male, Species Specificity, Sucrose, Taste, Morinda, Taste Perception

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