title: Attraction to and learning from social cues in fruitfly larvae.
abstract: We examined the use of social information in fruitfly larvae, which represent an ideal model system owing to their robust learning abilities, small number of neurons and well-studied neurogenetics. Focal larvae showed attraction to the distinct odour emanating from food occupied by other larvae. In controlled learning experiments, focal larvae preferred novel odours previously paired with food occupied by other larvae over novel odours previously paired with unoccupied food. When we gave groups of larvae a choice between food patches differing in quality, more larvae aggregated on the higher-quality food, suggesting that attraction to and learning about cues associated with other larvae can be beneficial. Furthermore, larvae were more likely to find the best available food patch in trials when that food patch was occupied by other larvae than in trials when that food patch was unoccupied. Our data suggest, however, that the benefits from joining others may be at least partially offset by the fitness costs of increased competition, because larvae reared in isolation did as well as or better than larvae reared in groups on three key fitness parameters: developmental rate, survival rate and adult dry body mass. Our work establishes fruitfly larvae as a highly tractable model species for further research on the mechanisms that modulate behaviour and learning in a social context.
authors.affiliation: Animal Behaviour Group, Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8S 4K1. duriskzt@mcmaster.ca
authors.forename: Zachary
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Durisko
authors.forename: Reuven
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Dukas
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D003463:Cues; D004331:Drosophila melanogaster / Q000502:physiology*; D007814:Larva / Q000502:physiology; D007858:Learning; D012919:Social Behavior
keywords: Drosophila melanogaster; fruitflies; larvae; social behaviour; social learning
references.citation: Sci Transl Med. 2012 Sep 19;4(152):152ra127
references.pmid: 22993294
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2011 Jun;14(6):757-62
references.pmid: 21516101
references.citation: Nature. 2010 Jan 14;463(7278):227-31
references.pmid: 19966787
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 1997 Aug;12(9):342-7
references.pmid: 21238100
references.citation: Nat Rev Genet. 2005 Apr;6(4):257-70
references.pmid: 15761469
references.citation: Physiol Zool. 1949 Jul;22(3):183-202
references.pmid: 18132096
references.citation: J Chem Ecol. 1985 Dec;11(12):1747-56
references.pmid: 24311338
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2008 Sep 23;18(18):1373-83
references.pmid: 18789691
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2008 Jun;11(6):676-82
references.pmid: 18469811
references.citation: Neuron. 2010 Mar 25;65(6):780-94
references.pmid: 20346755
references.citation: PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e42238
references.pmid: 22860093
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2008 Sep 23;18(18):1384-9
references.pmid: 18789689
references.citation: Fly (Austin). 2009 Jan-Mar;3(1):91-104
references.pmid: 19182539
references.citation: Science. 1970 Feb 27;167(3922):1262
references.pmid: 5411913
references.citation: Neuron. 2008 Jul 10;59(1):110-24
references.pmid: 18614033
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2011 Feb;14(2):190-9
references.pmid: 21186359
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2007 Aug 21;17(16):R703-13
references.pmid: 17714664
references.citation: Annu Rev Entomol. 2001;46:631-65
references.pmid: 11112182
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2009 May 12;19(9):730-4
references.pmid: 19361993
references.citation: Annu Rev Neurosci. 2007;30:505-33
references.pmid: 17506643
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Aug 7;270 Suppl 1:S33-5
references.pmid: 12952629
references.citation: Trends Neurosci. 2012 Feb;35(2):104-10
references.pmid: 22222349
references.citation: Sci Rep. 2012;2:768
references.pmid: 23105967
references.citation: Neuron. 2003 Jul 3;39(1):147-61
references.pmid: 12848939
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Dec 22;276(1677):4323-8
references.pmid: 19759037
references.citation: Science. 1979 Oct 5;206(4414):93-6
references.pmid: 17812455
references.citation: Fly (Austin). 2010 Jul-Sep;4(3):216-25
references.pmid: 20519966
references.citation: Science. 2002 Dec 6;298(5600):2010-2
references.pmid: 12471264
references.citation: Results Probl Cell Differ. 2012;54:83-117
references.pmid: 22009349
references.citation: Cell. 1994 Jul 15;78(1):23-33
references.pmid: 8033209
references.citation: Brain Res Bull. 2013 Mar;92:1-11
references.pmid: 21978945
references.citation: Learn Mem. 2003 May-Jun;10(3):217-25
references.pmid: 12773586
references.citation: Annu Rev Entomol. 2005;50:321-46
references.pmid: 15355243
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Oct 16;109 Suppl 2:17174-9
references.pmid: 22802679
references.citation: PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e47518
references.pmid: 23082175
references.citation: Hereditas. 2000;132(3):243-7
references.pmid: 11075519
references.citation: J Evol Biol. 2005 Sep;18(5):1324-31
references.pmid: 16135127
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2012 Feb 21;22(4):309-13
references.pmid: 22264604