Social Behaviours: Nurturing nature
Behaviours emerge under the combined influence of the environment (nurture) and the genetic information an individual inherited from its ancestors (nature). However, it is still difficult to tease apart the respective contribution of these different factors, which are often deeply intertwined. This is particularly the case with regards to social behaviours.
When animals with a mutation in a gene show a change in a specific behaviour, it is tempting to conclude that said gene is somehow involved in that behaviour. But this is not always the case. Animals are usually raised by their parents and grow up with siblings, who may share the same environment and genetic background (including this mutation). This makes it difficult to pinpoint exactly which elements, or combination of elements, are responsible for the emergence of these ‘behavioural phenotypes’ – that is, behaviours that are associated with a specific genotype.
To understand the direct effect of a specific mutation on the behavioural phenotype of an individual, the environment must be controlled for, including the genetic background of the individual’s social group – its genetic social environment (Baud et al., 2017). Now, in eLife, Rui Oliveira and co-workers based in Portugal, Israel and Poland – including Diogo Ribeiro as first author – report that, in zebrafish, the genetic social environment of an individual while it is growing up affects the adult’s behavioural phenotype (Ribeiro et al., 2020a).
Zebrafish are a good model to study the indirect effects of social genetic variation because they are highly social animals with a genome that can easily be modified. Ribeiro et al. first generated a mutant zebrafish line that lacks the gene for the oxytocin receptor, a protein involved in social-bonding behaviours in animals (Olff et al., 2013). A mutant fish was then either raised with its mutant siblings, or in a group of non-mutant fish. Similarly, a non-mutant individual was raised in a shoal of other non-mutants, or with mutant fish. Using different methods, the team then examined how each combination of genetic and social environment influenced the behavioural phenotype of the mutants.
Regardless of whether they were raised with mutants or non-mutants, fish that lacked the gene for the oxytocin receptor were always worse at discriminating between a familiar and an unfamiliar fish – a result predicted by previous studies (Ribeiro et al., 2020b). However, other experiments revealed that only mutant fish raised with other mutants were more reluctant to approach other fish and to integrate into a shoal. This showed that the genetic background of the group in which mutant fish were raised caused specific social phenotypes, as opposed to the loss of the oxytocin receptor gene alone.
This study may help researchers to understand how the genetic social environment can influence the impact of specific mutations on social interactions. It could also be relevant to work on other forms of behaviour, such as fear conditioning in mice: researchers wishing to investigate this behaviour would normally generate a mouse line lacking a gene thought to be involved in fear conditioning, and then examine how the mutation affects the behaviour of the mice. Variations in fear conditioning in the mutants would then be attributed to the genetic change rather than the social genetic environment. The work of Ribeiro et al. shows that researchers need to be aware of this effect, and control for it whenever possible.
These results also demonstrate the need to be cautious about the many human genetic studies that suggest potential links between a gene and the propensity to develop certain conditions. For instance, the general public now has easy access to DNA tests, which can link variations in certain genes to higher risks of becoming obese, being a smoker, or living a shorter life. However, a gene apparently associated with an increased risk for obesity may in fact be connected to increased parental anxiety. In this case, the weight gain would be a secondary effect of being raised by anxious parents. The impact of the social genetic environment should therefore be carefully assessed for all of these genes.
Finally, Ribeiro et al. show that specific social environments could potentially rescue or promote specific behavioural phenotypes, a finding that could be used to better study human behaviours and socialisation.
References
-
Oxytocin receptor signalling modulates novelty recognition but not social preference in zebrafishJournal of Neuroendocrinology 32:e12834.https://doi.org/10.1111/jne.12834
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2020, Dreosti
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 4,534
- views
-
- 108
- downloads
-
- 0
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
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)
Further reading
-
- Ecology
Understanding the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning stands as a cornerstone in ecological research. Extensive evidence now underscores the profound impact of species loss on the stability and dynamics of ecosystem functions. However, it remains unclear whether the loss of genetic diversity within key species yields similar consequences. Here, we delve into the intricate relationship between species diversity, genetic diversity, and ecosystem functions across three trophic levels – primary producers, primary consumers, and secondary consumers – in natural aquatic ecosystems. Our investigation involves estimating species diversity and genome-wide diversity – gauged within three pivotal species – within each trophic level, evaluating seven key ecosystem functions, and analyzing the magnitude of the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functions (BEFs). We found that, overall, the absolute effect size of genetic diversity on ecosystem functions mirrors that of species diversity in natural ecosystems. We nonetheless unveil a striking dichotomy: while genetic diversity was positively correlated with various ecosystem functions, species diversity displays a negative correlation with these functions. These intriguing antagonist effects of species and genetic diversity persist across the three trophic levels (underscoring its systemic nature), but were apparent only when BEFs were assessed within trophic levels rather than across them. This study reveals the complexity of predicting the consequences of genetic and species diversity loss under natural conditions, and emphasizes the need for further mechanistic models integrating these two facets of biodiversity.
-
- Ecology
- Evolutionary Biology
While host phenotypic manipulation by parasites is a widespread phenomenon, whether tumors, which can be likened to parasite entities, can also manipulate their hosts is not known. Theory predicts that this should nevertheless be the case, especially when tumors (neoplasms) are transmissible. We explored this hypothesis in a cnidarian Hydra model system, in which spontaneous tumors can occur in the lab, and lineages in which such neoplastic cells are vertically transmitted (through host budding) have been maintained for over 15 years. Remarkably, the hydras with long-term transmissible tumors show an unexpected increase in the number of their tentacles, allowing for the possibility that these neoplastic cells can manipulate the host. By experimentally transplanting healthy as well as neoplastic tissues derived from both recent and long-term transmissible tumors, we found that only the long-term transmissible tumors were able to trigger the growth of additional tentacles. Also, supernumerary tentacles, by permitting higher foraging efficiency for the host, were associated with an increased budding rate, thereby favoring the vertical transmission of tumors. To our knowledge, this is the first evidence that, like true parasites, transmissible tumors can evolve strategies to manipulate the phenotype of their host.