Genotype effect on regulation of behaviour by vitellogenin supports reproductive origin of honeybee foraging bias.
In honeybee colonies, food collection is performed by a group of mostly sterile females called workers. After an initial nest phase, workers begin foraging for nectar and pollen, but tend to bias their collection towards one or the other. The foraging choice of honeybees is influenced by vitellogenin (vg), an egg-yolk precursor protein that is expressed although workers typically do not lay eggs. The forager reproductive ground plan hypothesis (RGPH) proposes an evolutionary path in which the behavioural bias toward collecting nectar or pollen on foraging trips is influenced by variation in reproductive physiology, such as hormone levels and vg gene expression. Recently, the connections between vg and foraging behaviour were challenged by Oldroyd and Beekman (2008), who concluded from their study that the ovary, and especially vg, played no role in foraging behaviour of bees. We address their challenge directly by manipulating vg expression by RNA interference- (RNAi) mediated gene knockdown in two honeybee genotypes with different foraging behaviour and reproductive physiology. We show that the effect of vg on the food-loading decisions of the workers occurs only in the genotype where timing of foraging onset (by age) is also sensitive to vg levels. In the second genotype, changing vg levels do not affect foraging onset or bias. The effect of vg on workers' age at foraging onset is explained by the well-supported double repressor hypothesis (DHR), which describes a mutually inhibitory relationship between vg and juvenile hormone (JH) - an endocrine factor that influences development, reproduction, and behaviour in many insects. These results support the RGPH and demonstrate how it intersects with an established mechanism of honeybee behavioural control.
Ihle
Kate E
KE
School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe.
Page
Robert E
RE
Frederick
Katy
K
Fondrk
M Kim
MK
Amdam
Gro V
GV
Nat New Biol. 1971 Apr 14;230(15):220-2
5280174
Bioessays. 2005 Oct;27(10):999-1010
16163709
Trends Genet. 2007 Jul;23(7):334-41
17509723
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Mar 18;105(11):4226-31
18337502
J Theor Biol. 2003 Aug 21;223(4):451-64
12875823
J Insect Physiol. 2000 Mar;46(3):243-249
12770228
Genetics. 1995 Dec;141(4):1537-45
8601492
Am Nat. 2007 Jul;170(1):37-46
17853990
Naturwissenschaften. 2008 Oct;95(10):953-61
18545981
FEBS Lett. 2005 Sep 12;579(22):4961-5
16122739
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Aug 3;101(31):11350-5
15277665
Bioessays. 2007 Apr;29(4):334-43
17373656
PLoS Biol. 2007 Mar;5(3):e62
17341131
Wilhelm Roux Arch Entwickl Mech Org. 1974 Sep;174(3):285-296
28304856
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Jan 24;103(4):962-7
16418279
Nature. 2006 Jan 5;439(7072):76-8
16397498
PLoS One. 2008;3(10):e3397
18852894
Behav Brain Res. 2006 May 15;169(2):201-5
16466813
Nat Neurosci. 2008 Mar;11(3):309-17
18278039
Curr Top Dev Biol. 2006;74:253-86
16860670
J Insect Physiol. 2000 Feb;46(2):153-160
12770247
Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Nov;19(9):317-23
18805704
J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2007 Apr;193(4):461-70
17192826
BMC Biotechnol. 2003 Jan 20;3:1
12546706
Nat Neurosci. 2005 Oct;8(10):1350-5
16172603
Science. 2000 Sep 22;289(5487):2122-5
11000114
Nat Rev Genet. 2008 Oct;9(10):735-48
18802413
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Apr 24;104(17):7128-33
17438290
Behav Genet. 2009 Sep;39(5):541-53
19449161
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992 Dec 15;89(24):11726-9
1465390
PLoS Biol. 2008 Mar 4;6(3):e56
18318602
Gen Comp Endocrinol. 2005 Jul;142(3):347-56
15935161