fruitless tunes functional flexibility of courtship circuitry during development
- The Key Laboratory of Developmental Genes and Human Disease, School of Life Science and Technology, Southeast University, China
- Co-innovation Center of Neuroregeneration, Nantong University, China
Figures
Figure 1 with 4 supplements
fruM is required during pupation for female-directed courtship in adult males.
(A) Knocking down fruM using RNAi throughout development and adulthood eliminated male courtship toward virgin females. n = 24 for each. ***p<0.001, unpaired t-test. (B) A schematic of genetic strategy to knockdown fruM at different developmental stages for 2 days. Stages 1–9 refer to specific developmental stages from embryos to newly eclosed adults with interval of 2 days. (C and D) Courtship indices of males with fruM knocked down at specific developmental stages as indicated above toward virgin females. Males with fruM knocked down at stage 5 for 2 days (a period of pupation from stage 5 to 6, see above picture) rarely courted virgin females (C), and none successfully mated (D). Knocking down fruM at stages near 5 (e.g., stage 4 or 6) also partially impairs courtship and mating success. Knocking down fruM at earlier or later stages has no obvious effect on courtship and mating. n = 24 for each. Error bars indicate SEM. (E–H) Two day heat shock at 30°C effectively knocks down fruM expression during development. Anti-V5 and anti-FruM signals are dramatically decreased after heat shock at stage 5 (E and F) or 7 (G and H) in tub-GAL80ts/UAS-fruMi; fruGAL4/fruV5 males. Scale bars, 100 μm. Representative of five samples each.
-
Figure 1—source data 1
Source data for Figure 1.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/59224/elife-59224-fig1-data1-v2.xlsx
Figure 1—figure supplement 1
fruM microRNA efficiency and fruM expression patterns across development.
(A) The structure of the fruitless gene and designed primers against P1 and P4 transcripts. (B and C) The fruM microRNA significantly reduced fruM mRNA (B), but not common fru mRNA from the P4 promotor (C). n = 4 for each, ***p<0.001, n.s., not significant, Mann–Whitney U test. Error bars indicate SEM. (D–K) Expression pattern of fruGAL4 in different developmental stages. Scale bars, 50 μm. Representative of three samples each.
Figure 1—figure supplement 2
Validation of anti-FruM antibody and the fruV5.
Knock-in line. (A–D) The anti-FruM antibody shows intensive male-specific signals (A), and several pairs of false-positive neurons in females (B) as well as in fruM mutants (C and D). (E and F) Anti-V5 signals indicate male-specific FruM expression in fruV5/+ males. Scale bars, 100 μm. Representative of five samples each.
Figure 1—figure supplement 3
Adult fruM expression after 2 day induction of fruM microRNA during development.
(A–J) tub-GAL80ts/UAS-fruMi; fruGAL4/fruV5 males were heat shocked at 30°C for 2 days at each developmental stage (stages 1–9) and dissected at adulthood to check FruM expression using anti-V5 (left) and anti-FruM (middle) antibodies. Note that the anti-V5 signals were relatively stronger than the anti-FruM signals. Adult fruM expression was effectively restored if heat shocked at earlier stages (stages 1–5), but only partially restored if heat shocked at later stages (stages 6–9). Scale bars, 100 μm. Representative of five samples each.
Figure 1—figure supplement 4
fruM is required during a specific developmental period for regular neuronal development.
(A and B) GFP expression driven by fruGAL4 under regular condition (A) and restricted condition using GAL80ts at 18°C (B). Note that GAL80ts suppresses the majority but not 100% of fruGAL4 expression. (C) Labeling and morphological changes of the GRNs innervating VNC in males with fruM knocked down during specific developmental periods. The fruM-positive GRNs were only labeled if tub-GAL80ts/UAS-mCD8GFP; fruGAL4/UAS-fruMi males were heat shocked after stage 4 (yellow arrows). For those males heat shocked after stage 4, white arrows indicate whether there is midline crossing in these GRNs innervating VNC. (D) Percentage of males heat shocked at different developmental stages showed defect of midline crossing of the GRNs. Knocking down fruM at stages 5 and 6, but not later stages including adulthood, results in defect of midline crossing of the GRNs. Genotypes as indicated. Scale bars, 100 μm. Representative of five samples each.
Figure 2
fruM functions during adulthood to inhibit male–male courtship behaviors.
(A–C) Courtship behaviors performed by males that express traF or fruMi specifically during adulthood for 4 days. For male–female courtship (A), n = 17, 26, 23, 23, 24, 27, 24, and 28, respectively (from left to right), n.s., not significant, unpaired t-test. For single-pair male–male courtship (B), n = 18 for each. n.s., not significant, *p<0.05, unpaired t-test. For male chaining among eight males as a group (C), n = 8, 8, 8, 10, 8, 18, 8, and 18, respectively (from left to right). n.s., not significant, *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, Mann–Whitney U test. Error bars indicate SEM. Genotypes as indicated. (D and E) Anti-V5 and anti-FruM signals are dramatically decreased after heat shock during adulthood for 4 days in tub-GAL80ts/UAS-fruMi; fruGAL4/fruV5 males. Scale bars, 100 μm. Representative of five samples each.
-
Figure 2—source data 1
Source data for Figure 2.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/59224/elife-59224-fig2-data1-v2.xlsx
Figure 3 with 4 supplements
fruM tunes functional flexibility of the fruM circuitry.
(A and B) Wild-type males courted intensively toward virgin females (A, left bar), but rarely courted males (A, right bar) or displayed chaining behavior in groups of eight males (B). n = 24, 24, 8, respectively. ***p<0.001, unpaired t-test. (C) FruLexA/fru4-40 (fruM null) males rarely courted either females or males. n = 24 for each, **p<0.01, Mann–Whitney U test. (D) FruLexA/fru4-40 males did not show chaining behavior after 3 hr group-housing, but developed intensive chaining behavior after1-3 days. n = 8. (E) A summary of courtship acquisition independent of fruM. (F) RNAi against fruM efficiently decreased but not fully eliminated fruM expression. n = 4. ***p<0.001, Mann–Whitney U test. (G) Knocking down fruM in all fruGAL4 neurons generated males that have reversed sexual orientation such that they rarely courted females but intensively courted males. n = 24 and 19, respectively. ***p<0.001, unpaired t-test. (H) Males with fruM knocked down in all fruGAL4 neurons showed intensive chaining behavior at all time points (from 3 hr to 3 days upon group-housing). n = 7. (I) Distinct roles of low fruM (RNAi) and high fruM (wild-type) in regulating male–male and male–female courtship. (J) Males with fruM knocked down in fruGAL4 neurons in the brain had a lower level of courtship toward females, but their sexual orientation was not changed. n = 24 and 23, respectively. ***p<0.001, unpaired t-test. (K) Males with fruM knocked down in fruGAL4 neurons in brain showed low male chaining behavior initially but increasing levels of chaining behavior over 1–3 days. n = 6. (L) A summary of the role of fruM in brain in promoting male–female courtship and suppressing the experience-dependent acquisition or progression of male chaining behavior. (M) Males with fruM knocked down in fruGAL4 neurons outside brain generated bisexual males that have intensive male–female and male–male courtship. n = 24 for each. n.s., not significant, unpaired t-test. (N) Males with fruM knocked down in fruGAL4 neurons outside brain showed high male chaining behavior initially, but decreased levels of chaining behavior over 1–3 days. n = 8. (O) A summary of the role of fruM outside brain in suppressing male–male courtship behavior. Error bars indicate SEM.
-
Figure 3—source data 1
Source data for Figure 3.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/59224/elife-59224-fig3-data1-v2.xlsx
Figure 3—figure supplement 1
Comparison of male courtship with or without food.
Male–male courtship in fruM knocked down males is higher in the presence of food. n = 15, 17, 15, 18, 18, 18, 18, and 18 from left to right, respectively. ***p<0.001, unpaired t-test. Error bars indicate SEM.
-
Figure 3—figure supplement 1—source data 1
Source data for Figure 3—figure supplement 1.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/59224/elife-59224-fig3-figsupp1-data1-v2.xlsx
Figure 3—figure supplement 2
Courtship behaviors in fruM null males.
(A and B) Control fru4-40/+ males courted intensively toward virgin females (A, left bar) but rarely courted males (A, right bar), and hardly displayed male chaining behavior in groups of eight males during a 3 day test (B). n = 12, 12, and 8, respectively. ***p<0.001, Mann–Whitney U test. (C–F) fru4-40/ fruSat15 (C and D) and fru4-40/ fruAJ96u3 (E and F) males rarely courted either females or males but developed intensive male chaining behavior after 1–3 days. n = 12, 12, 8, 12, 12, and 8, respectively. ***p<0.001, Mann–Whitney U test. Error bars indicate SEM.
-
Figure 3—figure supplement 2—source data 1
Source data for Figure 3—figure supplement 2.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/59224/elife-59224-fig3-figsupp2-data1-v2.xlsx
Figure 3—figure supplement 3
Dividing fruM expression into two complementary parts.
(A) Expression pattern of the fruM circuitry revealed by fruGAL4 driving UAS-mCD8GFP (green), co-stained with nc82 (magenta). (B and C) Restricted fruGAL4 expression in brain (B) or outside brain (C) using a genetic strategy to divide fruGAL4 neurons into two parts. (D and E) Expression pattern of fruGAL4 driving UAS-mCD8GFP in forelegs (D, scale bars, 100 mm) and antennae (E, scale bars, 50 mm) in males with indicated genotypes. (F–I) FruM expression in spatially restricted knockdown of fruM revealed by anti-V5 signals. Genotypes as indicated. Scale bars, 100 μm. Representative of three samples each.
Figure 3—figure supplement 4
The role of fruM in P1 and ppk23-expressing neurons for male courtship.
(A) Knocking down fruM in P1 neurons did not affect male courtship behavior toward either females or males. n = 18 of each. n.s., not significant, Mann–Whitney U test. (B) Knocking down fruM in P1 neurons did not significantly affect male–male chaining behavior. n = 8 for each. ***p<0.001, n.s., not significant, Mann–Whitney U test. (C) Knocking down fruM in ppk23-expressing neurons did not affect male courtship toward females, but mildly increased male–male courtship. n = 18 of each. n.s., not significant, ***p<0.001, Mann–Whitney U test. (D) Knocking down fruM in ppk23-expressing neurons did not significantly affect male–male chaining behavior. n = 8 for each. *p<0.05, n.s., not significant, Mann–Whitney U test. Error bars indicate SEM.
-
Figure 3—figure supplement 4—source data 1
Source data for Figure 3—figure supplement 4.
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/59224/elife-59224-fig3-figsupp4-data1-v2.xlsx
Figure 4
A summary of fruM function in male courtship.
(A) FruM is required during pupation for neuronal development and possibly circuit wiring that builds the potential for innately female-directed courtship, while its function during adulthood is involved in inhibiting male–male courtship. Anti-V5 signals indicate FruM expression in larva, pupa and adult males (from left to right). Scale bars, 100 μm. (B) The sex circuitry without fruM or with different levels/patterns of fruM has different properties such that males would have experience-dependent courtship acquisition, or innate courtship but with different sexual orientation (heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual). Such flexibility of the sex circuitry is tuned by different fruM expression. Triangles and circles represent corresponding fruM levels and courtship levels (triangles: male–female courtship; circles: male–male courtship). Gray indicates systemic low level of fruM; green and magenta indicate spatially low level of fruM.
Tables
Key resources table
| Reagent type (species) or resource | Designation | Source or reference | Identifiers | Additional information |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antibody | Mouse monoclonal anti-Bruchpilot antibody (nc82) | Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank | Cat# nc82, RRID:AB_2314866 | IHC (1:50) |
| Antibody | Rabbit polyclonal anti-GFP | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat# A-11122, RRID:AB_221569 | IHC (1:1000) |
| Antibody | Donkey polyclonal anti-Rabbit, Alexa Fluor 488 | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat# A-21206, RRID:AB_2535792 | IHC (1:500) |
| Antibody | Donkey polyclonal anti-Mouse, Alexa Fluor 555 | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat# A-31570, RRID:AB_2536180 | IHC (1:500) |
| Antibody | Mouse monoclonal anti-V5-Tag:DyLight550 | Bio-Rad | Cat# MCA1360D550GA, RRID:AB_2687576 | IHC (1:500) |
| Antibody | Rabbit polyclonal anti-FruM | This study | N/A | IHC (1:200) |
| Plasmid | pCFD4 | Addgene | # 49411 | |
| Plasmid | pHD-DsRed | Addgene | # 51434 | |
| Plasmid | pET-28a | Sigma–Aldrich | # 69864 | |
| Chemical compound, drug | Normal Goat Serum (NGS) | Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories | Code# 005-000-121 RRID:AB_2336990 | |
| Chemical compound, drug | Paraformaldehyde (PFA) | Sigma–Aldrich | CAS# 30525-89-4 | 4% PFA in 1× PBS |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | fruV5 | This study | N/A | Described below |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | UAS-mCD8GFP; fruGAL4 | Stockinger et al., 2005 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | UAS-fruMi | Meissner et al., 2016 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | UAS-fruMiScr | Meissner et al., 2016 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | fruLexA | Mellert et al., 2010 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | fru4-40 | Pan and Baker, 2014 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | fruSat15 | Pan and Baker, 2014 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | fruAJ96u | Pan and Baker, 2014 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | ppk23-GAL4 | Thistle et al., 2012 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | Otd-Flp | Asahina et al., 2014 | N/A | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | tub-GAL80ts | Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center | BDSC_7019 | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | tub>GAL80> | Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center | BDSC_38881 | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | tub>stop>GAL80 | Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center | BDSC_39213 | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | UAS-traF | Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center | BDSC_4590 | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | R15A01-AD | Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center | BDSC_68837 | |
| Genetic reagent (D. melanogaster) | R71G01-DBD | Bloomington Drosophila Stock Center | BDSC_69507 | |
| Software, algorithm | ImageJ | National Institutes of Health | https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/ | |
| Software, algorithm | Prism 8 | GraphPad | https://www.graphpad.com/ |
Additional files
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
fruitless tunes functional flexibility of courtship circuitry during development
eLife 10:e59224.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.59224
