A subscription to JoVE is required to view this content. Sign in or start your free trial.

Method Article

A New Approach that Eliminates Handling for Studying Aggression and the "Loser" Effect in Drosophila melanogaster

9.6K views

⸱

DOI:

10.3791/53395

⸱

December 30th, 2015

 ,  , 

In This Article

Summary

During fruit fly fights, the behavioral patterns observed, fight dynamics, and associated learning and memory are influenced by experimental conditions. The protocol presented here describes a novel procedure that entirely eliminates handling of flies during experiments. This improves fight dynamics and allows formation of strong "loser" effects.

Abstract

Aggressive behavior in Drosophila melanogaster is composed of the sequential expression of stereotypical behavioral patterns (for analysis see 1). This complex behavior is influenced by genetic, hormonal and environmental factors. As in many organisms, previous fighting experience influences the fighting strategy of flies and the outcome of later contests: losing a fight increases the probability of losing later contests, revealing "loser" effects that likely involve learning and memory 2-4. The learning and memory that accompanies expression of complex social behaviors like aggression, is sensitive to pre-test handling of animals 5,6. Many experimental procedures are used in different laboratories to study aggression 7-9, however, no routinely used protocol that excludes handling of flies is currently available. Here, we report a new behavioral apparatus that eliminates handling of flies, using instead their innate negative geotactic responses to move animals into or out of fighting chambers. In this protocol, small circular fight arenas containing a food cup are divided into two equal halves by a removable plastic slider prior to introduction of flies. Flies enter chambers from their home isolation vials via sliding chamber doors and geotaxis. Upon removal of plastic sliders, flies are free to interact. After specified time periods, flies are separated again by sliders for subsequent experimentation. All of this is done easily without handling of individual flies. This apparatus offers a novel approach to study aggression and the associated learning and memory, including the formation of "loser" effects in fly fights. In addition, this new general-purpose behavioral apparatus can be employed to study other social behaviors of flies and should, in general, be of interest for investigating experience-related changes in fundamental behavioral processes.

Introduction

Aggression in animal systems is strongly associated with the acquisition and holding of resources such as food, territory and mates. Given the important role this plays in the fitness of individuals, it is not surprising that aggression has evolved across the animal kingdom. As an adaptive trait that directly benefits individuals, a strong learning and memory component is associated with aggression. In competition for social rank, previous fighting experience influences the outcome of later contests. In general, prior losing experience increases, and winning experience decreases, the probability of losing later contests (called "loser" and "winner" effects). "Loser" effects have been observed in a wide range of species, and some reports suggest that these can last for several days while "winner" effects usually are of shorter duration 2,10,11.

The first report of aggressive behavior in fruit flies (D. ampelophila) was by Sturtevant in 1915 in a paper concerned with sex recognition and sex selection 12. Half a century later, more complete examinations of male fruit fly aggression were made, that described most of the behavioral patterns observed during fruit fly fights. These experiments were mostly carried out in small groups of male and female flies observed over hours 13-15. Recently, with the addition of powerful genetic tools, dyadic single sex fight setups and shorter times of observation, D. melanogaster has emerged as an important model system for the study of the biology of aggression 1,16. Analysis of fights between same sex pairs of male and female flies demonstrated that aggression involves stereotypical behavioral patterns that transition from one to the other in a statistically reliable manner 1,17. Some of the behavioral patterns observed are sex-specific while others are observed in fights in both sexes. Male fights go to higher intensity levels than female fights and result in the formation of dominance relationships with clear "winners" and "losers". At present, many laboratories have started investigating the biochemical 18, neural 7,19-21, and genetic 22 underpinnings of aggression. Unfortunately, a meta-analysis of studies to gain insight into fight dynamics and the formation and maintenance of dominance relationships is problematic due to the use of a multiplicity of experimental procedures in different laboratories. Essentially all of the techniques described in the literature involve handling and manipulation of flies to introduce them into arenas 19,23,24 and during the behavioral experiment 3,4 to transfer flies out of arenas. Gentle aspiration is the most common way to manipulate flies 3,4,23-25, but cold or CO2 anesthesia are also used 9,26, even though previous studies already have reported that these procedures have deleterious effects on fly behavior 27,28. A period of at least 24 hr is recommended after the use of any anesthetics to minimize their effects on behavior 29,30.

Flies learn from previous fighting experience and modify their behavioral pattern usage in new situations, suggesting that learning and memory accompany and are consequences of agonistic encounters. In that sense, fly fights resemble to operant conditioning learning situations in which flies learn that a strategy has worked and then use it more and more often during subsequent encounters. Flies change their fighting strategies after dominance relationships have been established during fights, with winners lunging more and more and losers less and less. After a period of separation, previous losers show much more submissive behavior and are highly likely to lose 2nd fights when paired with naïve flies or previous winners 3,4. However, the absence of an experimental procedure that excludes handling of flies has made detailed studies of "loser" effects difficult. In a recent study, we compared two experimental procedures routinely used in laboratories (aspiration and cold-anesthesia) to introduce flies into behavioral chambers to the new procedure that eliminates handling. The results showed that cold-anesthesia had far greater negative effects on aggression than aspiration, but even aspiration reduced the level of aggressiveness by flies. Aspiration did, however, cause highly significant effects on the learning and memory that accompany aggression. Following identical protocol with two experimental procedures (aspiration and no handling), a robust "loser" effect was only observed when the handling of flies was eliminated from the experimental procedure 5,6.

Ideally, studies of Drosophila aggression in laboratories should include environmental situations that flies normally encounter in the wild (competition for resources, territory to defend and space to escape). In addition, experimental conditions should be optimized to reliably induce, observe and interpret the behavior under examination (try to minimize animal handling, limit the use of CO2 as anesthetic, and standardize the experimental procedures). In attempting to address most or all of these issues, we designed a new behavioral apparatus that eliminates handling of flies before, during and after introducing them to behavioral arenas. With these apparatus, flies use their innate negative geotaxis to be moved and transferred into and out of the fight chambers. By eliminating handling of flies, the protocol aims to: (a) reduce the behavioral variability among individuals; (b) decrease the time necessary for flies to interact and generate clear dominance relationships (males); and (c) reliably induce strong enough behavioral changes to allow formation of "loser" effects.

This protocol describes a new experimental apparatus and a step by step procedure to analyze aggression and to allow the formation of a strong "loser" effect in D. melanogaster. We expect that this behavioral apparatus can be easily adapted for the study of other social behaviors exhibited by fruit flies.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Protocol

Note: The following is a step-by-step description of the experimental protocol we use to allow reliable triggering of aggression between pairs of male fruit flies (D. melanogaster). This procedure induces the formation of a "loser" effect. Using this protocol, a short-term "winner" effect also has been recently reported 5,6. Figure 1 shows the timeline of the behavioral experiments.

Social isolation experiment flowchart; stages involve pupae isolation and fly behavioral analysis.

Figure 1. Timeline of aggression experiment. On day 1, late-stage male pupae (when wings become black) are isolated in freshly prepared isolation vials. On day 5 after emerging as adults, 4 day-old male flies are anesthetized with CO2 and painted with different colors for identification purposes. On day 7, food cups and fighting chambers are prepared to set up the behavioral experiments. Two 6-7 day-old adult males are loaded into the chambers and are able to interact. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

1. Day 1: Social Isolation of Pupae

  1. Raise and maintain fly stocks in an environmentally controlled 12 hr light/12 hr dark cycle incubator at 25 °C and 50% relative humidity.
  2. Prepare isolation vials: Heat fresh fly food until melted. Using a Pasteur pipette, transfer approximately 1.5 ml of melted fly food into single empty glass test tubes (1.6 x 10 cm). Allow the food to solidify.
  3. Isolate pupae: With a fine paintbrush, gently remove a late-stage male pupa (when wings become black) from the stock vial and place it on the side of a freshly prepared food containing test tube. Close isolation vials with cotton (Figure 2).
  4. Place isolation vials containing pupae into the 12 hr light/12 hr dark incubator at 25 °C and 50% relative humidity.

Fly pupa development; labeled test tube with late-stage pupa and fly food; biological study.

Figure 2. Social Isolation. One late-stage male pupa is placed on the side on a freshly prepared isolation vial. Isolation vials containing pupa are placed in the 12 hr light/12 hr dark incubator at 25 °C and 50% relative humidity. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

2. Day 5: Painting the Flies for Individual Identification Purposes

  1. Perform this step at day 5 with 4 day-old male flies and two days prior the behavioral experiments to minimize the negative effect of CO2 anesthesia.
  2. Anesthetize fly with CO2.
  3. With a fine toothpick, place a small dot of acrylic paint on the thorax. Avoid placing paint on the head, wings, abdomen or legs (Figure 3).
  4. Let paint dry for approximately 10 sec, and gently transfer flies back to their original isolation vials.
  5. Return isolation vials to the 12 hr light/12 hr dark incubator at 25 °C and 50% relative humidity.

Drosophila genetics study, phenotype comparison, experimental result, genetic marker flies.

Figure 3. Individual identification. After anesthetizing a fly with CO2, a small drop of acrylic paint is applied on the thorax. For individual identification purpose, different colors are used (white and blue here). See discussion below about use of CO2 at this step. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

3. Day 7: Preparing the Apparatus

  1. Prepare Food Cups:
    1. Heat fresh fly food until it melts.
    2. Using a Pasteur pipette, transfer approximately 0.8 ml food to the lid of a screw cap vial (1.5 cm diameter, 1 cm height) and allow to cool. Avoid air bubbles.
    3. Make fresh yeast paste by mixing dry yeast with a few drops of water. When thick, apply a small drop of yeast paste to the center of the food cup surface with a toothpick (Figure 4).

Yeast on fly food in research vial; experimental setup for drosophila culture studies.

Figure 4. Preparing the food cup. A food cup is prepared with fresh fly food. After the food solidifies, a dot of yeast paste is placed in the center of the food cup surface. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

  1. Prepare Individual Fighting Chambers:
    1. Thoroughly wash the apparatus and individual fighting chambers with water before use each time. Dry with paper towel before use.
    2. Place a food cup in the center of each fighting chamber and fix in place with a drop of putty.
    3. Cover fighting chambers with the apparatus lid (Figure 5).
    4. Place the apparatus into a high-humidity environment (60%) at 25 °C.
    5. Place a light source above the apparatus to illuminate the fighting chambers and set a video camera for recording from above.

Microfluidic device diagram for chemical analysis, featuring three reaction chambers.

Figure 5. Preparing the individual fighting chamber. The freshly prepared food cup with a dot of yeast paste on the surface is fixed into washed individual fighting chambers. Chambers are closed with the two-piece cover allowing insertion of an opaque plastic divider into individual fighting chambers. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

4. Day 7: Behavioral Experiment

  1. Perform the behavioral experiments with 6-7 day-old male flies.
  2. Insert plastic dividers into each fighting chamber.
  3. Remove the cotton plug from the isolation tube and position the tube below an open hole on the side of the apparatus.
  4. Let the fly enter into the fighting chamber by negative geotaxis, usually within a few seconds.
  5. Close the sliding wall after the fly has left the tube and entered the chamber.
  6. Repeat the procedure to introduce the second fly into the fight chamber on the other side of the apparatus.
  7. Place the apparatus back in the illuminated videotaping position.
  8. Begin video recording and remove the plastic divider to allow flies to interact.
    1. For Aggression Experiments:
      1. In these experiments, record fights for at least 20 min to ensure the formation of strong dominance relationships.
      2. After the desired time, stop video recording.
      3. Remove flies from the fighting chambers by reversing the procedure described above.
      4. Thoroughly wash the behavioral apparatus with mild detergent and water after each use and rinse.
    2. For "Loser" Effect Experiments:
      Note: In these experiments, first fights are considered as the conditioning phase and second fights as the test phase. The period of rest between fights can differ but 10 min allows formation of a strong "loser" effect.
      1. Follow the procedure described above to perform a first fight.
      2. CRITICAL STEP: To induce the formation of a "loser" mentality, ensure that first fights are at least 20 min long in order to establish strong dominance relationships.  After 20 min, re-insert the plastic divider into fighting chambers to separate the flies.
      3. After a 10 min period of rest, gently remove the plastic divider to allow flies to interact for second fights.
      4. At the end of the second 20 min fight, stop the video recording.
      5. Remove flies from behavioral chambers as above.
      6. Once again, thoroughly clean the behavioral apparatus.

5. Behavioral Analysis

  1. Transferring Movies
    1. Connect cameras to the computer.
    2. Convert flies .MTS to .mov flies and join movies clips together, using video converting software and the option "join selected clips".
    3. Observe and analyze each movie with video reader software.
  2. Scoring Behavior
    Note: this can be done manually or using behavioral analysis program software if available. The illustration below describes a possible manual analysis for a "loser" effect.
    1. Score the time of the first encounter between the flies on the food cup (encounters are interactions between pairs of flies that last at least 2 sec) and the time of appearance of the first lunge (a behavioral pattern in which one fly rises high on its hind legs and snaps down on and attempts to grab the opponent). Then, score the latency to lunge (the interval between the first encounter and the first lunge).
    2. Count the total number of encounters and lunges during a fight.
      Note: If desired, one also can score other behavioral patterns, like wing threat, boxing, fencing, retreat or the numbers of encounters before the first lunge, for example.
    3. Score the time of establishment of dominance (time between the first encounter and the time when one fly retreats for three consecutive times off the food cup after receiving lunges). Note which fly is the winner and which the loser of the fight.
  3. Calculating a "Loser" Effect
    1. Divide the number of fights in which previous losers lose 2nd fights (Losers that lose: LL) by the total number of fights, and multiply by 100. The percentage obtained represents the "loser" effect:
      [(# flies LL) / (# total fight)] x 100
    2. Use a Chi-square test to compare whether the "loser" effect is statistically different from the expected value of 50%.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Results

This section presents the design of the behavioral chamber and the analysis of a typical set of behavioral experiments following the protocol described above measuring aggression and the formation of a "loser" effect. Also illustrated are samples of other behaviors that can be measured using this apparatus.

Figure 6 shows a schematic representation of the new apparatus. The apparatus is composed of three cylindrical wells (dimension: 22.86 mm diameter, 17 mm height) that are t...

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Discussion

The modern era of using Drosophila with its powerful genetic methods as a model organism for the study of aggression began about a dozen years ago with the introduction of novel experimental arenas in which reliable fighting behavior could be obtained with single pairs of flies 1,7,8,17,19. These arenas included desired resources (a food cup, potential mates) and a space for loser flies to retreat into. When results obtained with these arenas were added to previous knowledge about fruit fly fight beha...

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Disclosures

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by grants from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM099883 and GM074675) to E.A.K. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We thank the people from our machine shop at Harvard Medical School for the design of the behavioral apparatus (contact: http://mikesmachine.com).

Author contributions: S.T., B.C. designed the behavioral apparatus. S.T. designed and optimized the experimental protocol. S.T. and B.C. performed and analyzed the experiments. S.T., E.A.K. and B.C. wrote the paper.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Materials

List of materials used in this article
NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
Drosophila melanogaster pupaBloomington Stock Center
Standard fly foodFabricated in-house. 
Behavioral chambersMike machineFabricated in-house. Directly  contact the compagny for more informations.
Borosilicate glass vialsVWR International 47729-57616 x 10 mm
CottonFisherbrand22-456-881Any brand can be used
Pasteur pipettesVWR International 53300-567
Paintbrush Blick Art Material06157-7030Round , Size 3/0
ToothpickN/AN/AAny brand can be used
Acrylic paint (blue/white)Blick Art Material01637-5172/01637-1022Any brand can be used
Dry active yeastSigmaYSC2-500G
Srew cap tubeVWR International 10011-394 15 mm diameter, 10 mm height
EppendorfVWR International 22363212
TapeN/AN/AAny brand can be used
Plastic slicesElectron Microscopy Sciences70329-4022 x 40 x 0.25 mm Thickness
Light source (bulb)VWR International 500003-418Any brand can be used
TimerVWR International 62344-641Any brand can be used
IncubatorPercivalDirectly contact the constructor for more informations.
Carbon Dioxide Dry (CO2)Medical-Technical Gases, Inc14H31
BinocularNikonSMZ-745Any brand can be used
Camera (SONY Handycam  HDR-CX330)B&HSOHDRCX330BAny brand can be used
ComputerWith a minimum of 1.4 Ghz Processor, running Microsoft Windows or Machintosh HD
ClipWrapDownload onlineAny importing software can be used
QuickTime PlayerDownload onlineAny reading software can be used
GraphPad SoftwareOnlineAny statistical software can be used

References

  1. Chen, S., Lee, A. Y., Bowens, N. M., Huber, R., Kravitz, E. A. Fighting fruit flies: a model system for the study of aggression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 99, 5664-5668 (2002).
  2. Hsu, Y., Earley, R. L., Wolf, L. L. Modulation of aggressive behaviour by fighting experience: mechanisms and contest outcomes. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 81, 33-74 (2006).
  3. Yurkovic, A., Wang, O., Basu, A. C., Kravitz, E. A. Learning and memory associated with aggression in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 103, 17519-17524 (2006).
  4. Penn, J. K., Zito, M. F., Kravitz, E. A. A single social defeat reduces aggression in a highly aggressive strain of Drosophila. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 107, 12682-12686 (2010).
  5. Trannoy, S., Chowdhury, B., Kravitz, E. A. Handling alters aggression and 'loser' effect formation in Drosophila melanogaster. Learn Mem. 22, 64-68 (2015).
  6. Trannoy, S., Kravitz, E. A. Learning and memory during aggression in Drosophila: handling affects aggression and the formation of a ''loser'' effect. Journal of Nature and Science. 1 (3), e56(2015).
  7. Alekseyenko, O. V., Chan, Y. B., Li, R., Kravitz, E. A. Single dopaminergic neurons that modulate aggression in Drosophila. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 110, 6151-6156 (2013).
  8. Dierick, H. A., Greenspan, R. J. Serotonin and neuropeptide F have opposite modulatory effects on fly aggression. Nat Genet. 39, 678-682 (2007).
  9. Williams, M. J., et al. Regulation of aggression by obesity-linked genes TfAP-2 and Twz through octopamine signaling in Drosophila. Genetics. 196, 349-362 (2014).
  10. Chase, I. D., Bartolomeo, C., Dugatkin, L. A. Aggressive interactions and inter-contest interval: how long do winners keep winning? Anim. Behav. 48, 393-400 (1994).
  11. Goessmann, C., Hemelrijk, C., Huber, R. The formation and maintenance of crayfish hierarchies: behavioral and self-structuring properties. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 48, 418-428 (2000).
  12. Sturtevant, A. H. Experiments on sex recognition and the problem of sexual selection in Drosophila. J Animal Behav. 5, 351-366 (1915).
  13. Jacobs, M. E. Influence of light on mating of Drosophila melanogaster. Ecology. 41, 182-188 (1960).
  14. Dow, M. A., von Schilcher, F. Aggression and mating success in Drosophila melanogaster. Nature. 254, 511-512 (1975).
  15. Hoffmann, A. A laboratory study of male territoriality in the sibling species Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans. Anim. Behav. 35, 807-818 (1987).
  16. Vrontou, E., Nilsen, S. P., Demir, E., Kravitz, E. A., Dickson, B. J. fruitless regulates aggression and dominance in Drosophila. Nat Neurosci. 9, 1469-1471 (2006).
  17. Nilsen, S. P., Chan, Y. B., Huber, R., Kravitz, E. A. Gender-selective patterns of aggressive behavior in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 101, 12342-12347 (2004).
  18. Fernandez, M. P., Kravitz, E. A. Aggression and courtship in Drosophila: pheromonal communication and sex recognition. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 199, 1065-1076 (2013).
  19. Alekseyenko, O. V., et al. Single serotonergic neurons that modulate aggression in Drosophila. Current biology : CB. 24, 2700-2707 (2014).
  20. Asahina, K., et al. Tachykinin-expressing neurons control male-specific aggressive arousal in Drosophila. Cell. 156, 221-235 (2014).
  21. Andrews, J. C., et al. Octopamine neuromodulation regulates Gr32a-linked aggression and courtship pathways in Drosophila males. PLoS genetics. 10, e1004356(2014).
  22. Zwarts, L., et al. Complex genetic architecture of Drosophila aggressive behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 108, 17070-17075 (2011).
  23. Dierick, H. A. A method for quantifying aggression in male Drosophila melanogaster. Nat Protoc. 2, 2712-2718 (2007).
  24. Wang, L., et al. Hierarchical chemosensory regulation of male-male social interactions in Drosophila. Nat Neurosci. 14, 757-762 (2011).
  25. Davis, S. M., Thomas, A. L., Nomie, K. J., Huang, L., Dierick, H. A. Tailless and Atrophin control Drosophila aggression by regulating neuropeptide signalling in the pars intercerebralis. Nat Commun. 5, 3177(2014).
  26. Yuan, Q., Song, Y., Yang, C. H., Jan, L. Y., Jan, Y. N. Female contact modulates male aggression via a sexually dimorphic GABAergic circuit in Drosophila. Nat Neurosci. 17, 81-88 (2014).
  27. Perron, J. M., Huot, L., Corrivault, G. W., Chawla, S. S. Effects of carbon dioxide anaesthesia on Drosophila melanogaster. J Insect Physiol. 18, 1869-1874 (1972).
  28. Joachim, D., Curtsinger, J. W. Genotype and anesthetic determine mate choice in Drosophila melanogaster. Behav Genet. 20, 73-79 (1990).
  29. Barron, A. B. Anaesthetising Drosophila for behavioural studies. J Insect Physiol. 46, 439-442 (2000).
  30. Greenspan, R. J. Fly Pushing: The theory and Practice of Drosophila Genetics. , Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. Cold Spring Harbor. (1997).
  31. Cabral, L. G., Foley, B. R., Nuzhdin, S. V. Does sex trade with violence among genotypes in Drosophila melanogaster? PLoS One. 3 (4), e1986(2008).

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Reprints and Permissions

Explore More Articles

Drosophila AggressionBehavioral ChamberNegative GeotaxisFly Handling EliminationIsolation Vial PreparationPlastic Divider UseVideo Recording AnalysisDominance Relationship FormationSocial Behavior Study