Experimental evolution of learning ability in fruit flies

The presence of genetic variation for learning ability in animals opens the way for experiments asking how and under what ecological circumstances improved learning ability should evolve. Here we report experimental evolution of learning ability in Drosophila melanogaster. We exposed experimental populations for 51 generations to conditions that we expected to favor associative learning with regard to oviposition substrate choice. Flies that learned to associate a chemical cue (quinine) with a particular substrate, and still avoided this substrate several hours after the cue had been removed, were expected to contribute more alleles to the next generation. From about generation 15 on, the experimental populations showed marked ability to avoid oviposition substrates that several hours earlier had contained the chemical cue. The improved response to conditioning was also expressed when the flies were faced with a choice of novel media. We demonstrate that these behavioral changes are caused by the evolution of both a higher learning rate and a better memory.

[1]  Jerry Hirsch,et al.  Selection for conditionability in Drosophila melanogaster , 1992 .

[2]  M. Heisenberg,et al.  Evolutionary significance of courtship conditioning in Drosophila melanogaster , 2002, Animal Behaviour.

[3]  O. Volpert,et al.  Inducer-stimulated Fas targets activated endothelium for destruction by anti-angiogenic thrombospondin-1 and pigment epithelium–derived factor , 2002, Nature Medicine.

[4]  Daniel R. Papaj,et al.  ECOLOGICAL AND EVOLUTIONARY ASPECTS OF LEARNING IN PHYTOPHAGOUS INSECTS , 1989 .

[5]  C. Parmesan,et al.  Absence of adaptive learning from the oviposition foraging behaviour of a checkerspot butterfly , 1995, Animal Behaviour.

[6]  R. Menzel,et al.  Time-course of memory formation differs in honey bee lines selected for good and poor learning , 1988, Animal Behaviour.

[7]  D. M. Power.  Biometry. The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research; Statistical Tables , 1970 .

[8]  D. Stephens.  Change, regularity, and value in the evolution of animal learning , 1991 .

[9]  M. Egas,et al.  Adaptive learning of host preference in a herbivorous arthropod , 2001 .

[10]  M. Cobb,et al.  Olfactory coding in a simple system: adaptation in Drosophila larvae , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[11]  T. Tully,et al.  Discovery of genes involved with learning and memory: an experimental synthesis of Hirschian and Benzerian perspectives. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  K. White,et al.  Identification of genes involved in Drosophila melanogaster geotaxis, a complex behavioral trait , 2002, Nature Genetics.

[13]  R. Dukas,et al.  Cognitive ecology : the evolutionary ecology of information processing and decision making , 1998 .

[14]  R. Dukas,et al.  Learning improves growth rate in grasshoppers. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  R. Rescorla.  Behavioral studies of Pavlovian conditioning. , 1988, Annual review of neuroscience.

[16]  F. James Rohlf,et al.  Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research , 1969 .

[17]  R Dukas,et al.  Costs of memory: ideas and predictions. , 1999, Journal of theoretical biology.

[18]  J. Gillespie.  Natural selection with varying selection coefficients – a haploid model , 1973 .

[19]  J. Hirsch,et al.  Behavior-genetic analysis of Phormia regina: conditioning, reliable individual differences, and selection. , 1977, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  J. Dubnau,et al.  Gene discovery in Drosophila: new insights for learning and memory. , 1998, Annual review of neuroscience.