Skip to main content
PLOS Biology logoLink to PLOS Biology
. 2026 Sep 29;24(9):e3004026. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3004026

Intestinal lipid metabolism controls molecular and behavioral immunity through NHR-68 and gut–brain signaling in Caenorhabditis elegans

Jie Ren 1,#, Yu Sang 1,#, Young-Mo Kim 2, Ernesto S Nakayasu 2, Alejandro Aballay 1,3,*
Editor: Mark J Alkema4
PMCID: PMC13649124  PMID: 42809567

Abstract

Animals must allocate limited energetic resources across competing defense programs in response to infection. Here, we show that the conserved nuclear hormone receptor NHR-68 integrates fatty acid metabolism with the neural control of molecular and behavioral immunity in Caenorhabditis elegans. Acting in parallel with NHR-10, NHR-68 controls genes involved in polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) metabolism. Loss of NHR-68 disrupts linoleic acid (LA) homeostasis, impairing pathogen avoidance behavior. Supplementation with LA restores avoidance, and fat-3 inhibition, which elevates LA, enhances pathogen avoidance, whereas loss of LA synthesis by fat-2 inhibition diminishes this behavior, indicating that LA promotes behavioral immunity. We further show that NHR-68 acts in the intestine to regulate linoleic acid homeostasis, and that changes in intestinal lipid metabolism influence an AWC-dependent pathogen-avoidance circuit through intestine-to-neuron communication. NHR-68 suppresses activation of the PMK-1/p38 MAPK and DAF-16/FOXO pathways, which mediate molecular immune responses. These findings identify a gut-brain transcriptional circuit that connects intestinal lipid metabolism to neural and immune outputs, revealing a mechanism by which the metabolic state coordinates behavioral and molecular defenses to optimize host protection.


Mounting an immune response is energetically costly, and so host defenses are often influenced by internal metabolic states. This study identifies a gut-brain signaling mechanism in C. elegans wherein intestinal NHR-68 coordinates fatty acid homeostasis to shape pathogen avoidance and molecular immune responses.

Introduction

Animals must continuously balance the allocation of limited resources among competing physiological needs, including growth, metabolism, and defense. Mounting immune responses is energetically costly, and excessive or prolonged activation can compromise fitness. As a result, host defense systems have evolved strategies that integrate immune signaling with metabolic state and environmental cues to optimize protection while preserving energy homeostasis. The coordination of these regulatory layers across tissues remains poorly understood.

Nuclear hormone receptors (NHRs) are a family of transcription factors that couple metabolic state to gene-expression programs controlling development, metabolism, reproduction, and stress responses [1]. These receptors act by binding to specific signaling molecules, such as steroid hormones, retinoids, and thyroid hormones, which modulate gene expression to control a variety of physiological processes [2]. In C. elegans, NHRs are involved in key biological functions such as responses to oxidative stress [3], starvation [4,5], hypoxia [6], and pathogen infection [7–12]. The C. elegans genome encodes over 280 NHRs, more than in humans or mice, and only a small subset has been functionally characterized [13].

In C. elegans, the intestine is a major metabolic and immune organ that also influences behavior through inter-tissue communication [14–17]. In addition to molecular immune responses, C. elegans relies on pathogen avoidance as an important behavioral defense strategy. Animals can detect pathogenic bacteria and undergo aversive learning to reduce subsequent exposure, and this process is regulated by multiple neuronal and signaling pathways [18–20]. Fatty-acid metabolism is a central readout of intestinal metabolic state governed by networks of NHRs [21,22]. C. elegans has evolved an array of conserved desaturase (fat) and elongase (elo) genes that can synthesize a broad range of fatty acids de novo from acetyl-CoA [23]. In addition to their roles in nervous system function [24], both monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) can exhibit antibacterial functions [25]. The MUFA oleate is necessary for innate immune gene expression and protects C. elegans from Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection [26,27]. The PUFA eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) also enhances the C. elegans immune response and functions as an effector that can disrupt or inhibit biofilm formation, helping to regulate host immunity against Candida albicans [28]. Genetic studies have shown that fatty-acid desaturation and elongation pathways, including fat-2 and fat-3, regulate polyunsaturated fatty acid composition and affect susceptibility to P. aeruginosa infection [27,29]. In addition, fatty-acid supplementation can modulate host immune responses and survival during bacterial infection, supporting a functional link between lipid metabolism and innate immunity [26,30]. Despite these links, the specific intestinal metabolic changes that occur during bacterial infection and how they are integrated with neural control remain unclear.

Here, we show that NHR-68, a member of the expanded C. elegans nuclear hormone receptor family with similarities to mammalian hepatocyte nuclear factor 4-alpha (HNF4α), acts in parallel with NHR-10 to coordinate fatty acid metabolism, innate immune signaling, and pathogen avoidance. NHR-68 regulates genes involved in PUFA biosynthesis, and its loss reduces linoleic acid (LA), a fatty acid that promotes avoidance behavior. We found that NHR-68 acts in the intestine and signals through the AWC chemosensory neuron to drive behavioral immunity, while suppressing the PMK-1/p38 MAPK and DAF-16/FOXO pathways that mediate molecular immune responses. Together, these findings identify a transcriptional mechanism that links intestinal metabolism to neural and immune outputs. Finally, our results suggest a general principle for cross-tissue coordination of defense. By aligning intestinal lipid metabolism with neural avoidance and modulation of immune activation, nuclear receptors provide a way to balance energetic costs and benefits during infection. This principle may be conserved given the broad conservation of nuclear receptor signaling and lipid-derived cues.

Results

NHR-10 and NHR-68 inhibit innate immune activation

Nuclear hormone receptors (NHRs) are well-characterized regulators of metabolism, development, and reproduction [1], but their involvement in innate immune regulation remains poorly understood. To identify NHRs that control immune activation, we performed a reverse genetic screen using 236 nhr genes from the Ahringer C. elegans RNAi feeding library [31]. As a readout of intestinal immune activation, we used a transcriptional reporter for clec-60, a C-type lectin gene whose expression is strongly induced in response to infection and other immune triggers [32–34]. The clec-60p::gfp reporter is widely used as a readout for the activation of protective innate immune pathways in the C. elegans intestine [32–34].

We identified nine nhr genes (nhr-77, nhr-10, nhr-130, nhr-222, nhr-162, nhr-42, nhr-140, nhr-68, and nhr-54) whose knockdown resulted in pronounced increased clec-60p::gfp expression (Fig 1A; Fig A in S1 Appendix; S1 Table). Most of these NHRs, including nhr-77, nhr-10, nhr-42, nhr-68, and nhr-54, have been identified in genome-wide transcription factor profiling studies as components of regulatory networks associated with metabolic and stress-responsive processes [35], although their roles in intestinal immune regulation remain largely uncharacterized. Notably, nhr-10 and nhr-68 were of particular interest, as they are known to function together as a persistence detection module in propionate metabolism [36]. Given their shared roles in metabolic regulation and in the expression of immune gene clec-60, we focused our analysis on nhr-10 and nhr-68. Animals treated with double RNAi targeting both nhr-10 and nhr-68 showed a further enhancement of the clec-60p::gfp signal compared to either single knockdown (Fig 1A; Fig A in S1 Appendix). This was confirmed by qRT-PCR, which revealed an ~8–10-fold increase in clec-60 transcript levels in single mutants and a ~20-fold increase in the double mutant (Fig 1B), indicating that the two NHRs have additive effects in suppressing immune activation.

Fig 1. NHR-10 and NHR-68 inhibit innate immune response.

Fig 1

(A) Representative fluorescence micrographs of clec-60p::gfp animals grown on E. coli HT115 carrying empty vector or RNAi against nhr-77, nhr-10, nhr-130, nhr-222, nhr-162, nhr-42, nhr-140, nhr-68, nhr-54, or nhr-10 and nhr-68 (n = 8 animals per condition per experiment; N = 3 independent experiments). Fluorescence images were captured with 100-ms exposures. Scale bar, 200 µm. (B) qRT–PCR analysis of the immune gene clec-60 in wild-type, nhr-10(tm4695), nhr-68(gk708) and nhr-10(tm4695); nhr-68(gk708) animals fed on E. coli. Data are presented as the mean ± SD from three independent biological replicates (N = 3; n = 200 animals per condition per biological replicate). ***p < 0.001, one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple-comparison test. (C) Survival of WT, nhr-10(tm4695), nhr-68(gk708) or nhr-10(tm4695);nhr-68(gk708) animals grown on P. aeruginosa at 25 °C. Mean survival times were 2.06, 2.36, 2.82, and 3.13 days, respectively. Data are presented from three independent experiments, with 90 animals per condition per experiment (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). The Kaplan–Meier method was used to calculate the survival fractions, and statistical significance between survival curves was determined using the log-rank test. WT vs. nhr-10(tm4695), p < 0.01; WT vs. nhr-68(gk708), p < 0.001; WT vs. nhr-10(tm4695); nhr-68(gk708), p < 0.001; nhr-10(tm4695) vs. nhr-10(tm4695); nhr-68(gk708), p < 0.001; nhr-68(gk708) vs. nhr-10(tm4695); nhr-68(gk708), p = 0.0435. (D) Occupancy index for WT, nhr-10(tm4695), nhr-68(gk708) or nhr-10(tm4695);nhr-68(gk708) animals on P. aeruginosa at 8 h and 12 h. The occupancy index was calculated as (Non lawn/Ntotal). Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (N = 3). The data underlying this Figure can be found in S1 Data.

We then evaluated the nhr-10(tm4695), nhr-68(gk708), two deletion alleles predicted to cause loss of function, as well as nhr-10(tm4695);nhr-68(gk708) animals for susceptibility to P. aeruginosa. Both single mutants survived longer than wild-type animals, indicating increased resistance, and nhr-10(tm4695);nhr-68(gk708) animals survived slightly longer than either single mutant, consistent with an additive effect of the two genes (Fig 1C). C. elegans uses behavioral avoidance as a defense against pathogens [37,38]. We found that nhr-10(tm4695) and nhr-68(gk708) animals showed significantly reduced bacterial avoidance behavior, with a modest further reduction in the nhr-10(tm4695);nhr-68(gk708) animals (Fig 1D; Fig BA in S1 Appendix). Reversal and locomotion assays confirmed that the reduced avoidance phenotype was not due to impaired locomotor ability in these mutants (Fig BB and BC in S1 Appendix). These findings indicate that NHR-10 and NHR-68 concurrently suppress molecular immunity linked to pathogen resistance while promoting pathogen avoidance behavior.

Because nhr-68(gk708) animals displayed a pathogen-resistant phenotype, reduced bacterial avoidance, and increased clec-60 expression, we next asked whether the expression of nhr-68 could reverse these phenotypes. To address this, we constructed an nhr-68p::nhr-68::gfp translational reporter expressing GFP-tagged NHR-68 under its native promoter to rescue expression in the mutant background. As shown in Fig 2A, nhr-68::gfp was expressed in the hypodermis, intestine, and head neurons, consistent with a previous study [39]. Expression of nhr-68 also rescued the increased clec-60 mRNA levels in nhr-68(gk708) animals (Fig 2B) and partially rescued pathogen susceptibility (Fig 2C) and bacterial avoidance (Fig 2D; Fig BD in S1 Appendix). These results indicate that nhr-68 expression compensates for the mutant phenotype and that nhr-10 and nhr-68 act in a parallel fashion to control molecular and behavioral immune responses to P. aeruginosa.

Fig 2. The expression of nhr-68 restored pathogen susceptibility.

Fig 2

(A) Representative fluorescence micrographs of nhr-68(gk708);nhr-68p::nhr-68::gfp animals. n = 30; data are representative of four independent experiments. Fluorescence images were captured using 400-ms exposures. Scale bars indicate 100 µm in the left two panels and 50 µm in the right two panels. (B) qRT–PCR analysis of the immune gene clec-60 in wild-type, nhr-68(gk708) or nhr-68(gk708);nhr-68p::nhr-68 animals fed on E. coli. Data are presented as the mean ± SD from three independent biological experiments. N = 3; n = 200 animals per condition per biological replicate. ***p < 0.001, one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple-comparison test. (C) Survival of wild-type N2, nhr-68(gk708) or nhr-68(gk708);nhr-68p::nhr-68 animals on P. aeruginosa at 25 °C. Mean survival times were 2.07, 2.83, and 2.35 days, respectively. Data are presented from three independent experiments, with 90 animals per condition per experiment (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). Wild-type vs. nhr-68(gk708), p < 0.0001; Wild-type vs. nhr-68(gk708); nhr-68p::nhr-68, p = 0.0002; nhr-68(gk708) vs. nhr-68(gk708); nhr-68p::nhr-68, p = 0.0202. (D) P. aeruginosa occupancy indexes for WT, nhr-68(gk708) and nhr-68(gk708);nhr-68p::nhr-68 animals at 8 h and 12 h after seeding. The occupancy index was calculated as (Non lawn/Ntotal). Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (N = 3). The data underlying this Figure can be found in S1 Data.

Previous studies showed that NHR-10 and NHR-68 regulate genes linked to vitamin B12 metabolism and act together as a persistence detector for propionate metabolism, enabling metabolic network rewiring in response to dietary inputs [36]. To assess whether vitamin B12 supplementation affects the NHR-68-regulated immune response, we measured expression of the immune gene clec-60 with or without vitamin B12. Vitamin B12 did not alter clec-60 expression in nhr-68(gk708) animals (Fig CA in S1 Appendix), suggesting that the NHR-68-mediated regulation of clec-60 is unlikely to be directly linked to vitamin B12 metabolism under these conditions.

We showed that nhr-68(gk708) animals exhibit increased pathogen resistance against P. aeruginosa (Figs 1C and 2C). To test whether vitamin B12 influences pathogen resistance, we examined resistance using E. faecalis, which, unlike P. aeruginosa [40], is vitamin B12 auxotrophic and relies on salvage [41]. As shown in Fig CB in S1 Appendix, nhr-68(gk708) animals displayed increased resistance to E. faecalis, and this phenotype was unaffected by vitamin B12 supplementation. Together with the additive effects observed for NHR-10 and NHR-68 in controlling clec-60 expression and pathogen resistance (Fig 1C and 1D), these results support a model in which NHR-10 and NHR-68 both contribute to the regulation of molecular and behavioral immune responses.

NHR-68 inhibits the PMK-1 and DAF-16 pathways during immune activation

To investigate the mechanism underlying the increased survival of nhr-68(gk708) animals upon P. aeruginosa (Fig 1C), we performed an RNA-seq analysis of the changes in gene expression profiles of these animals after 12 h infection with P. aeruginosa. Principal component analysis (PCA) of the transcriptomes revealed clear separation between nhr-68(gk708) and wild-type animals, indicating distinct gene expression patterns (Fig DA in S1 Appendix). To reduce false positives, only genes with a fold change greater than two and p < 0.05 were considered differentially expressed (S2 Table).

An unbiased gene enrichment analysis performed using the Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated Discovery (DAVID) (https://david.ncifcrf.gov/) [42] revealed that the innate immune response Gene Ontology (GO) cluster had the second-highest number of hits, following signal transduction. Other enriched GO clusters corresponded to transmembrane transport and proteolysis (Fig 3A and S3 Table).

Fig 3. NHR-68 inhibits immune pathways.

Fig 3

(A) Gene Ontology analysis of genes upregulated in nhr-68(gk708) vs. WT animals after 12 h infection with P. aeruginosa. The results were filtered to include only terms significantly enriched in nhr-68(gk708) with a q value <0.1. (B) The representation factors of the identified upregulated genes controlled by the PMK-1, DAF-16, SKN-1, and ELT-2 pathways. (C) qRT–PCR analysis of PMK-1- and DAF-16-dependent genes in nhr-68(gk708) compared with WT animals. (N = 3 biological replicates). (D) Survival of wild-type and nhr-68(gk708) animals fed empty vector control or pmk-1 RNAi followed by exposure to P. aeruginosa. Mean survival times were 2.40 and 3.01 days for empty vector control RNAi and 1.88 and 1.92 days for pmk-1 RNAi, respectively. Wild-type vs. nhr-68(gk708), p < 0.0001 and p = 0.1121 for empty vector control and pmk-1 RNAi, respectively. Data are presented from three independent experiments, with 90 animals per condition per experiment (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). The Kaplan–Meier method was used to calculate the survival fractions, and statistical significance between survival curves was determined using the log-rank test. (E) Survival of wild-type and nhr-68(gk708) animals fed empty vector control or daf-16 RNAi followed by exposure to P. aeruginosa. Mean survival times were 2.40 and 3.01 days for empty vector control RNAi and 2.14 and 2.43 days for daf-16 RNAi, respectively. Wild-type vs. nhr-68(gk708), p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0130 for empty vector control and daf-16 RNAi, respectively. Data are presented from three independent experiments, with 90 animals per condition per experiment (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). The Kaplan–Meier method was used to calculate the survival fractions, and statistical significance between survival curves was determined using the log-rank test. The data underlying this Figure can be found in S1 Data.

To further explore immune activation, we compared genes upregulated in nhr-68(gk708) animals to previously identified gene sets regulated by immune pathways in C. elegans (S4 Table). Gene sets controlled by PMK-1 and DAF-16 showed significant overlap with genes whose expression increased in nhr-68(gk708) animals infected with P. aeruginosa (Fig 3B). qRT-PCR validation of selected genes confirmed the RNA-seq data (Fig 3C), supporting the conclusion that loss of nhr-68 leads to activation of these immune genes.

To identify NHR-68-controlled genes in the absence of infection, we also performed RNA-seq on nhr-68(gk708) and wild-type animals fed only on E. coli OP50. PCA analysis showed clear separation between the two groups, indicating distinct expression profiles (Fig DB in S1 Appendix). Comparison of nhr-68 mutants and wild-type animals under these basal conditions revealed genes directly regulated by NHR-68 (S2 Table). Gene Ontology analysis revealed that genes involved in the innate immune response were highly enriched (Fig EA in S1 Appendix and S3 Table). Our analysis identified immune genes that overlap with the NHR-68-regulated genes from previously published studies [36,43], as well as additional immune-related genes uniquely detected in our study (S3 Table), despite differences in experimental conditions highlighted in S3 Table. Many of these NHR-68-dependent immune genes overlapped with immune-related gene sets previously associated with the PMK-1 and DAF-16 pathways, as well as with the ELT-2 and SKN-1 pathways (Fig EB in S1 Appendix and S4 Table), consistent with the overlap patterns observed in P. aeruginosa-infected samples. These results suggest that NHR-68 represses a subset of immune genes even in the absence of pathogen exposure and functions as a negative regulator of multiple immune signaling pathways.

We hypothesized that if PMK-1 and DAF-16 activation drives the enhanced survival of nhr-68(gk708) animals during P. aeruginosa infection, then impairing these pathways should reduce the phenotype. Indeed, RNAi knockdown of pmk-1 or daf-16 reduced the magnitude of the increased survival in nhr-68(gk708) animals infected with P. aeruginosa (Fig 3D and 3E). These results indicate that the activation of the PMK-1 and DAF-16 immune pathways contributes to the increased pathogen resistance observed in nhr-68(gk708) animals.

Having shown that NHR-68 inhibits the PMK-1 and DAF-16 pathways, we next compared NHR-68-dependent gene sets with P. aeruginosa-regulated transcriptomes (S2 and S3 Tables). This analysis revealed overlaps with both infection-induced and infection-repressed gene categories, as well as with immune and metabolic regulatory transcriptional programs, including multiple nuclear hormone receptors. These shared transcriptional features further support a role for NHR-68 in coordinating immune and metabolic gene regulation during pathogen response. Consistent with this transcriptional response, qRT-PCR analysis showed that both nhr-68 and nhr-10 transcript levels were modestly increased upon exposure to P. aeruginosa in wild-type animals (Fig FA in S1 Appendix), indicating that pathogen infection also modulates NHR expression.

To further examine the relationship between NHR-10 and NHR-68 in immune gene regulation, we quantified additional NHR-68-regulated immune genes in nhr-10(tm4695) animals (Fig FB in S1 Appendix). Analysis of shared target genes revealed that most were upregulated, whereas a subset was unaffected, indicating partial overlap between NHR-10- and NHR-68-mediated immune gene regulation.

NHR-68 regulates avoidance behavior through polyunsaturated fatty acid metabolism

Pathogen avoidance can be strongly induced by disrupting the defecation motor program, and aex-5 RNAi animals, which undergo intestinal distension, robustly avoid P. aeruginosa [19,20]. A gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS)-based metabolomic profiling we had carried out on these strong-avoiding animals indicated that linoleic acid (LA), an omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid, was markedly elevated relative to controls (Fig 4A and S5 Table).

Fig 4. LA accumulation enhances pathogen avoidance.

Fig 4

(A) Metabolomic analysis. Animals fed on empty vector or aex-5 RNAi were harvested for metabolomic analysis using GC–MS. The top-ranked differentially abundant metabolites were identified, and their relative expression was plotted in a heatmap. (B) Relative linoleic acid content measured by LC–HRMS in wild-type and nhr-68(gk708) mutant animals is shown as a heatmap; each column represents one of three biological replicates. (C) P. aeruginosa occupancy index in wild-type and nhr-68(gk708) animals treated with vehicle or LA at 8 h and 12 h. The occupancy index was calculated as (Non lawn/Ntotal). LA, linoleic acid. The bars represent the means, while the error bars indicate the SDs of three independent experiments (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment); ***p < 0.001. (D) Schematic of the PUFA synthesis pathway in C. elegans, adapted from [29]. The diagram depicts all known steps in PUFA synthesis as well as the elongase and desaturase enzymes involved. Abbreviations: PA, palmitic acid; PLA, palmitoleic acid; VA, vaccenic acid; SA, stearic acid; OA, oleic acid; LA, linoleic acid; ALA, alpha-linolenic acid; GLA, gamma-linolenic acid; STA, stearidonic acid; DGLA, dihommo gamma-linolenic acid; ETA, eicosatrienoic acid; AA, arachidonic acid; EPA, eicosapentaenoic acid. (E) P. aeruginosa occupancy index in wild-type and nhr-68(gk708) animals treated with vehicle or VA at 8 h and 12 h. The occupancy index was calculated as (Non lawn/Ntotal). VA, vaccenic acid. The bars represent the means, while the error bars indicate the SDs of three independent experiments (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). (F) qRT–PCR analysis of fat-1, fat-2, fat-3 and fat-4 in animals fed on E. coli. Data are presented as the mean ± SD from three independent experiments (N = 3; n = 200 animals per condition per biological replicate). ***p < 0.001, t test. (G) GC–MS analysis of linoleic acid abundance in fat-3 RNAi animals. Animals fed empty vector or fat-3 RNAi were harvested under E. coli or P. aeruginosa conditions and subjected to GC–MS-based metabolomic profiling. (H) Quantification of linoleic acid abundance in control and P. aeruginosa-exposed animals. Data are presented as mean ± SD. One-way ANOVA was used to determine statistical significance. N = 3; n = 2,000 animals per condition per experiment. (I) P. aeruginosa occupancy index of wild-type and nhr-68(gk708) animals fed empty vector control or fat-3 RNAi at 8 h and 12 h. (J) P. aeruginosa occupancy index of wild-type and nhr-68(gk708) animals fed empty vector control or fat-2 RNAi at 8 h and 12 h. The occupancy index was calculated as (Non lawn/Ntotal). Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). The data underlying this Figure can be found in S1 Data.

Because NHRs play an important role in regulating lipid metabolism and maintaining fatty acid homeostasis [21,22,44], we measured LA levels in nhr-68(gk708) animals. Liquid chromatography–high-resolution mass spectrometry (LC–HRMS) analysis showed a significant decrease in LA content in nhr-68(gk708) animals (Fig 4B and S5 Table). To assess whether elevated LA levels contribute to pathogen avoidance, we supplemented wild-type animals with LA and observed enhanced avoidance behavior toward P. aeruginosa (Fig 4C and Fig GA in S1 Appendix). We ruled out a direct aversive effect of LA using bacterial choice assays (Fig GB in S1 Appendix). To test whether LA is required for NHR-68-mediated avoidance, we supplemented nhr-68(gk708) animals with LA. While these nhr-68(gk708) animals typically exhibit reduced avoidance behavior, LA treatment fully rescued this defect and further enhanced avoidance behavior. The enhanced avoidance observed in nhr-68(gk708) animals was comparable to that of wild-type animals supplemented with LA (Fig 4C and Fig GA in S1 Appendix). Importantly, despite its strong effects on pathogen avoidance, LA supplementation did not alter the increased survival phenotype of nhr-68(gk708) animals (Figs HA in S1 Appendix), indicating that LA-dependent behavioral changes are not sufficient to modify survival outcomes. To examine whether this effect was specific to LA, we tested vaccenic acid (VA; 18:1 n-7), a monounsaturated fatty acid structurally similar to LA but outside the LA metabolic pathway (Fig 4D). VA supplementation did not affect general avoidance behavior or NHR-68-regulated avoidance behavior (Fig 4E and Fig GC in S1 Appendix).

To determine if nhr-68 influences LA metabolism, we measured the expression of genes involved in LA biosynthesis. In nhr-68(gk708) animals, we observed elevated expression of fat-3 and fat-4, which are involved in downstream desaturation steps, while fat-1 and fat-2 showed no significant changes (Fig 4F). This expression pattern implies a disruption in LA accumulation in the absence of functional NHR-68.

To test whether LA is controlled by the desaturase pathway downstream of NHR-68, we examined LA in fat-3 RNAi animals. Based on the PUFA biosynthetic pathway (Fig 4D), fat-3 knockdown is predicted to cause LA accumulation due to reduced downstream desaturation. GC–MS profiling revealed a significant increase in LA levels upon fat-3 knockdown (Fig 4G and 4H; S5 Table), consistent with FAT-3 functioning in LA utilization downstream of NHR-68.

Behaviorally, fat-3 RNAi, which increases LA levels (Fig 4G and 4H; S5 Table), also enhanced pathogen avoidance in wild-type animals (Fig 4I and Fig GD in S1 Appendix), linking LA accumulation to avoidance behavior. Importantly, fat-3 RNAi did not increase the survival of nhr-68(gk708) animals (Fig HB in S1 Appendix), further supporting that LA-associated behavioral regulation is separable from survival regulation in this context.

To examine whether FAT-3 also mediates pathogen-associated changes in LA homeostasis, we quantified LA levels by GC-MS in vector control and fat-3 RNAi animals under both E. coli and P. aeruginosa conditions. P. aeruginosa exposure increased LA abundance in vector control animals, whereas no further increase was observed in fat-3 RNAi animals, which already displayed elevated basal LA levels (Fig 4G and 4H; S5 Table). These data are consistent with a role for FAT-3 in regulating LA levels during infection.

Additionally, reduction of LA synthesis by fat-2 RNAi significantly decreased pathogen avoidance, phenocopying the defect observed in nhr-68(gk708) animals (Fig 4J and Fig GE in S1 Appendix). Together, these findings identify LA as a key metabolic component of the NHR-68-regulated fatty-acid pathway that promotes pathogen-avoidance behavior and link intestinal lipid homeostasis to behavioral immune regulation.

NHR-68 controls pathogen avoidance via the chemosensory neuron AWC

Previous studies have shown that chemosensory neurons AWB, AWC, and ASI are required for P. aeruginosa-induced avoidance behavior [20]. Consistent with these findings, genetic ablation of AWC, AWB, or ASI significantly reduced avoidance behavior in the corresponding control animals (Fig 5A–5C and Fig IA–IC in S1 Appendix, empty vector groups). To identify the specific neurons involved in NHR-68-regulated avoidance of P. aeruginosa, we used animals with genetic ablation of those individual chemosensory neurons and knocked down nhr-68 by RNAi in each background. ASE(−) animals were used as a negative control, as ASE neurons are required for E. faecalis-induced avoidance but not P. aeruginosa-induced avoidance [20]. Among the neuron-ablated strains, only AWC(−) animals failed to exhibit an additional reduction in avoidance behavior upon nhr-68 knockdown (Fig 5A and Fig IA in S1 Appendix). Ablation of AWB, ASI, or ASE neurons did not abolish the effect of nhr-68 knockdown (Fig 5B–5D and Fig IB–ID in S1 Appendix), indicating that the effect of nhr-68 RNAi is retained in those backgrounds. These results indicate that AWC neurons are required for the NHR-68-dependent component of behavioral immunity against P. aeruginosa.

Fig 5. NHR-68 RNAi inhibits pathogen avoidance behavior via the chemosensory neuron AWC.

Fig 5

(A) P. aeruginosa occupancy indexes of WT and AWC(−) animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi at 8 h and 12 h. (B) P. aeruginosa occupancy index for WT and AWB(−) animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi at 8 h and 12 h. (C) P. aeruginosa occupancy index of WT and ASI(−) animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi at 8 h and 12 h. (D) P. aeruginosa occupancy index of WT and ASE(−) animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi at 8 hr and 12 hr. (E–H) P. aeruginosa occupancy indexes at 8 h and 12 h for WT and sensory neuron-ablated animals treated with vehicle or LA. Each panel includes WT animals and one neuron-ablated strain: (E) AWC(−), (F) AWB(−), (G) ASI(−), or (H) ASE(−). LA, linoleic acid. The means and SDs of three independent experiments are shown; the bars, indicated by solid black horizontal lines within the violin plots, represent the means, and the error bars, indicated by thin horizontal lines within the violin plots, represent the SD. Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, and ns = not significant. The data underlying this Figure can be found in S1 Data.

AWC-mediated olfactory adaptation is known to depend on PUFA signaling, and animals with mutations in fat genes display defects in AWC function [45]. Since our findings indicate that LA enhances avoidance behavior (Fig 4C and Fig GA in S1 Appendix), we next asked whether this effect is also dependent on specific sensory neurons. LA supplementation failed to rescue the avoidance defect in AWC(−) animals, which remained significantly impaired relative to wild-type controls (Fig 5E and Fig IE in S1 Appendix), whereas it enhanced avoidance behavior in AWB(−), ASI(−), and ASE(−) animals (Fig 5F–5H and Fig IF–IH in S1 Appendix). Together, these data suggest that AWC neurons are required for both NHR-68-regulated and PUFA-induced avoidance of P. aeruginosa, indicating that AWC functions as a consistent component of the behavioral circuit in this response.

Interestingly, reduced avoidance in nhr-68-deficient animals did not compromise host defense against P. aeruginosa. Instead, nhr-68(gk708) animals showed increased survival despite their avoidance defect (Fig 1C). To test whether the neuronal circuitry controlling avoidance also contributes to survival, we examined nhr-68(gk708) animals in backgrounds lacking individual chemosensory neurons. Ablation of AWC, AWB, ASI, or ASE neurons did not alter the enhanced survival phenotype of nhr-68(gk708) animals on P. aeruginosa (Fig JA–JD in S1 Appendix). Under each condition, nhr-68 RNAi animals remained more resistant than controls. These results indicate that the increased pathogen resistance conferred by loss of nhr-68 is independent of the chemosensory neurons required for avoidance behavior. Together, these findings suggest that NHR-68 regulates behavioral immunity via AWC neurons, whereas its effect on host survival is mediated through a distinct mechanism.

The intestinal function of NHR-68 is required for avoidance behavior against P. aeruginosa

To identify the tissues in which nhr-68 functions to regulate avoidance behavior, we performed tissue-specific RNAi knockdown of nhr-68. Intestinal knockdown using the intestinal-specific RNAi strain MGH171 significantly decreased avoidance behavior (Fig 6A and 6B). In contrast, neuron-specific knockdown using strain MAH677, which expresses sid-1 pan-neuronally and has been previously validated for efficient neuronal RNAi [46,47], had no effect on avoidance behavior (Fig 6C), indicating that neuronal NHR-68 is not required for behavioral immunity.

Fig 6. The intestinal function of NHR-68 is required for pathogen avoidance behavior.

Fig 6

(A) P. aeruginosa occupancy index of wild-type animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi at 8 h and 12 h. (B) P. aeruginosa occupancy index of MGH171 animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi at 8 h and 12 h. (C) P. aeruginosa occupancy index of MAH677 animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi at 8 hr and 12 hr. (D) P. aeruginosa occupancy index for WT, nhr-68(gk708) and nhr-68(gk708);vha-6p::nhr-68 animals at 8 h and 12 h after seeding. The occupancy index was calculated as (Non lawn/Ntotal). Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). (E) Survival of wild-type animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi on P. aeruginosa at 25 °C. Mean survival times were 2.24 and 2.89 days, respectively. Empty vector vs. nhr-68 RNAi, p < 0.0001. (F) Survival of MGH171 animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi on P. aeruginosa at 25 °C. Mean survival times were 2.23 and 3.02 days, respectively. Empty vector vs. nhr-68 RNAi, p < 0.0001. (G) Survival of MAH677 animals fed empty vector control or nhr-68 RNAi on P. aeruginosa at 25 °C. Mean survival times were 2.27 and 2.28 days, respectively. Empty vector vs. nhr-68 RNAi, p = ns. (H) Survival of wild-type N2, nhr-68(gk708), or nhr-68(gk708);vha-6p::nhr-68 animals on P. aeruginosa at 25 °C. Mean survival times were 2.17, 2.81, and 2.40 days, respectively. Wild-type vs. nhr-68(gk708), p < 0.0001; Wild-type vs. nhr-68(gk708);vha-6p::nhr-68, p = 0.0145; nhr-68(gk708) vs. nhr-68(gk708);vha-6p::nhr-68, p = 0.0017. Data are presented from three independent experiments, with 90 animals per condition per experiment (N = 3; n = 90 animals per condition per experiment). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the survival fractions, and statistical significance between survival curves was determined using the log-rank test. The data underlying this Figure can be found in S1 Data.

Since intestinal knockdown of nhr-68 impaired avoidance behavior, we next tested whether intestine-specific expression of nhr-68 is sufficient to rescue the reduced avoidance behavior of nhr-68(gk708) animals. To drive expression specifically in the intestine, we placed nhr-68 under the control of the vha-6 promoter, which is active in intestinal cells [48]. Intestinal expression of nhr-68 rescued the reduced avoidance behavior of nhr-68(gk708) animals (Fig 6D).

Consistent with these findings, intestine-specific knockdown of nhr-68 also increased survival on P. aeruginosa, whereas neuron-specific knockdown had no detectable effect (Fig 6E–6G), indicating that intestinal NHR-68 is required for both behavioral and survival responses during infection. In addition, intestinal expression of nhr-68 partially rescued the pathogen susceptibility of nhr-68(gk708) animals (Fig 6H), further supporting a major role of intestinal NHR-68 in host defense.

Together, these findings indicate NHR-68 functions in the intestine to regulate avoidance behavior against P. aeruginosa.

Discussion

In this study, we identify NHR-68 as a transcriptional regulator that coordinates metabolism and immune responses in C. elegans (Fig 7). Our findings show that NHR-68 controls LA metabolism in the intestine and that this regulation influences an AWC-dependent pathogen-avoidance behavior. These results define a transcriptional circuit linking intestinal lipid metabolism to the neural control of behavioral immunity, expanding our understanding of how metabolic state influences host defense.

Fig 7. NHR-68 integrates lipid metabolism with behavioral and molecular immunity.

Fig 7

NHR-68 acts in the intestine to regulate linoleic acid homeostasis through control of fat-3 expression. Changes in intestinal lipid metabolism influence an AWC-dependent pathogen-avoidance circuit through currently unidentified intestine-to-neuron signaling mechanisms, enhancing survival during P. aeruginosa infection. In parallel, NHR-68 suppresses PMK-1/p38 MAPK and DAF-16/FOXO immune pathways, coordinating behavioral and molecular defenses to optimize host protection. Created in BioRender. Sang, Y. (2026). https://BioRender.com/pdbx63j.

By regulating PUFA levels, NHR-68 modulates the organism’s ability to mount behavioral responses to pathogens. Fatty acids, particularly PUFAs, are integral to the regulation of various biological processes, including cellular signaling, immune modulation, and membrane dynamics [28,49]. Our data reveal that alterations in intestinal PUFA metabolism directly affect the ability of C. elegans to detect and avoid pathogenic bacteria. This finding is consistent with prior studies showing that metabolic changes can influence behavioral responses to environmental stressors, including infection [50]. Although fat-3 expression is elevated in nhr-68(gk708) animals, it remains unclear whether NHR-68 regulates fat-3 through direct promoter binding or indirectly through additional transcriptional regulators. Future studies will be required to define the molecular mechanisms underlying this regulation.

We demonstrate that AWC neurons are required for both NHR-68-regulated and LA-enhanced avoidance behavior. However, our data do not identify the molecular signal that links intestinal lipid metabolism to AWC-dependent behavioral responses. While LA supplementation and fatty-acid desaturase perturbations strongly implicate intestinal PUFA homeostasis in this process, future studies will be required to determine whether the relevant signal is LA itself, a lipid-derived metabolite, a neuroendocrine factor, or another intestine-to-neuron signaling mechanism. This connection supports the idea that neural circuits can act as interfaces between physiological states and immune responses. Recent studies have further highlighted the importance of peripheral-to-neuron signaling in coordinating metabolism and behavior. Emerging evidence suggests that metabolic and physiological states in peripheral tissues, including the intestine, can modulate neuronal activity and behavioral outputs through diverse signaling mechanisms [51–53]. In particular, lipid-derived signals and metabolic intermediates have been shown to influence sensory neuron function and behavioral decision-making [54]. These findings provide a conceptual framework for our observations and support a model in which intestinal lipid metabolism, regulated by NHR-68, can shape AWC-dependent pathogen avoidance behavior through periphery-to-neuron communication. PUFAs have been shown to influence chemosensory and olfactory neuron function, including AWC-mediated adaption [45]. Previous work demonstrated that FAT-3 functions cell autonomously in AWC neurons to regulate olfactory adaptation [45], suggesting that PUFA metabolism can directly influence sensory neuron function. Our data further support an additional non-cell-autonomous mechanism in which changes in intestinal lipid metabolic state influence an AWC-dependent behavioral circuit through intestine-to-neuron communication.

In addition to modulating behavior, NHR-68 regulates the activation of the p38/PMK-1 and FOXO/DAF-16 pathways, two conserved regulators of innate immunity. The enhanced expression of immune effectors in nhr-68 mutants, coupled with the suppression of pathogen resistance by pmk-1 or daf-16 RNAi, indicates that NHR-68 functions upstream of these signaling modules. This regulatory role suggests that NHR-68 coordinates metabolic state with immune activation. Beyond PMK-1 and DAF-16, innate immune responses in C. elegans are also shaped by additional conserved pathways, including the insulin/IGF-1 signaling (IIS) axis and the SKN-1/Nrf2 oxidative stress response pathway [55,56], which together integrate metabolic and stress cues to fine-tune host defense. By tempering overactive immune responses, NHR-68 may help balance resource allocation during infection—a principle potentially conserved across species. Such a regulatory balance may prevent the detrimental effects of chronic immune activation, especially in nutrient-limited environments.

In exploring immune gene regulation, we found that NHR-10 and NHR-68 act additively to repress target genes. Our qRT-PCR and reporter analyses show that the double knockdown induces higher clec-60 expression than either single knockdown, demonstrating that both NHRs independently contribute to immune gene repression. This additive effect supports their joint contribution to the regulation of molecular and behavioral immune responses. This behavior likely reflects a context-dependent mechanism, where NHR-10 and NHR-68 respond to distinct upstream signals and may target partially overlapping genes with different transcriptional cofactors, highlighting the versatility of nuclear hormone receptor networks in coordinating immune responses.

NHR-10 and NHR-68 have been previously described as a transcriptional feed-forward module in the context of vitamin B12 and propionate metabolism, where NHR-10 acts upstream of NHR-68 to form an AND-logic regulatory circuit required for metabolic gene regulation [36]. In this study, we extend the functional relevance of this conserved module to immune regulation. NHR-10 and NHR-68 jointly regulate pathogen avoidance behavior and immune gene clec-60 expression. Notably, although NHR-10 functions upstream of NHR-68 at the transcriptional level, their effects on immune outputs are additive, suggesting that feed-forward regulatory wiring can generate graded or combinatorial transcriptional outputs depending on physiological context. This framework provides a mechanism by which conserved nuclear receptor modules integrate metabolic signals and immune regulation, while allowing flexible tuning of downstream functional responses such as behavioral immunity and pathogen resistance.

In addition to NHR-10 and NHR-68, our RNAi screen also identified several other NHRs (e.g., nhr-77, nhr-130, nhr-222, nhr-162, nhr-42, nhr-140, and nhr-54) whose knockdown enhanced immune reporter expression. The majority of these receptors remain poorly characterized at the functional level. However, as members of the expanded nuclear hormone receptor family in C. elegans, they are likely to participate in broader metabolic and stress-responsive regulatory networks. Their identification in our screen raises the possibility that additional, previously uncharacterized NHRs may contribute to coordinating metabolic state with intestinal immune responses. While genome-wide transcriptomic comparison between nhr-10 and nhr-68 mutants remains an interesting direction for future studies, our current genetic and targeted transcriptional analyses indicate that NHR-10 and NHR-68 have partially overlapping roles in coordinating metabolic state and immune regulation.

In wild-type animals, NHR-10 and NHR-68 likely function as metabolic sensors, responding to propionate accumulation and vitamin B12 availability. While their specific ligands remain unidentified, their behavior is consistent with ligand-dependent transcription factors. Upon infection, metabolic stress or altered nutrient absorption could modulate NHR activity, potentially shifting the balance of propionate detoxification and lipid metabolism. Further studies are needed to determine whether infection directly influences NHR-10/NHR-68 activity or ligand availability.

This intersection between lipid metabolism, immune regulation, and behavior is especially notable given the well-established role of PUFAs in inflammation and immunity [57,58]. Previous studies have also shown that dietary PUFA supplementation can reshape fatty-acid composition and influence host physiology in C. elegans, further supporting the idea that changes in PUFA availability can have broad functional consequences [30,59]. While PUFAs have been studied in the context of cytokine signaling and membrane composition, our findings highlight their importance in shaping behavioral immune responses. That avoidance behavior can be modulated by a defined metabolic product and a transcriptional regulator opens new avenues for dissecting how host physiology integrates metabolic cues to tailor immune and behavioral defenses.

The gut-brain axis has gained increasing attention in recent years as a crucial link between the microbiome, metabolism, and behavior [60–62]. Our results identify NHR-68 as a transcriptional regulator that couples intestinal lipid metabolism to immune and neural outputs in C. elegans. By tuning polyunsaturated-fatty-acid balance, NHR-68 shapes pathogen-avoidance behavior through AWC neurons while restraining PMK-1 and DAF-16-dependent immune activation. This coupling provides a mechanistic basis for coordinating behavioral and molecular defenses with the energetic demands of infection. Because nuclear receptors and lipid-derived signals are conserved, similar gut-to-brain mechanisms may integrate metabolic and immune states in other animals. Together, these findings reveal a general principle in which nuclear receptors align metabolic regulation with adaptive host-defense strategies.

Materials and methods

Strains

The C. elegans strains were cultured under standard conditions and fed E. coli OP50. All strains were maintained on nematode growth medium (NGM) seeded with E. coli (OP50). The C. elegans strains used include wild-type N2 Bristol, JIN810 agIs26 [clec-60p::gfp + myo-2p::mCherry], RB969 fat-2(ok873), VC1527 nhr-68(gk708), MGH171 alxIs9 [vha-6p::sid-1::SL2::GFP] and MAH677 sid-1(qt9) V; sqIs71 [rgef-1p::GFP + rgef-1p::sid-1], PY7502 oyIs85 [ceh36p::TU#813 + ceh36p::TU#814 + srtx1p::GFP + unc122p::DsRed] [AWC(−)], JN1715 peIs1715 [str1p::mCasp-1 + unc122p::GFP] AWB(−), PY7505 oyIs84 [gpa-4p::TU#813 + gcy-27p::GFP + unc-122p::DsRed] [ASI(−)], PR680 che-1(p680) [ASE(−)] were obtained from the Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN). nhr-10(tm4695) was obtained from the National Bioresource Project (NBRP), Japan. Detailed information about the strains used is provided in S6 Table.

The following bacterial strains were used: Escherichia coli OP50, E. coli HT115(DE3), Pseudomonas aeruginosa PA14, Enterococcus faecalis OG1RF. The E. coli OP50, E. coli HT115(DE3), and P. aeruginosa PA14 cultures were grown at 37 °C in Luria–Bertani (LB) broth. The E. faecalis cultures were grown at 37 °C in brain heart infusion (BHI) broth.

Feeding RNAi NHR screen

RNA interference (RNAi) was employed to induce loss-of-function RNAi phenotypes by feeding nematodes with E. coli HT115(DE3) expressing double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) homologous to the indicated target gene [31,63]. E. coli with the appropriate vectors was grown in LB broth containing ampicillin (100 mg/mL) and tetracycline (12.5 mg/mL) at 37 °C overnight and seeded onto NGM plates containing 100 mg/mL ampicillin and 3 mM isopropyl b-D-thiogalactoside (IPTG) (RNAi plates). RNAi-expressing bacteria were allowed to grow overnight at 37 °C. Gravid adults were transferred to RNAi-expressing bacterial lawns and allowed to lay eggs for 2 hours. The gravid adults were removed, and the eggs were allowed to develop into young adults for downstream assays. unc-22 RNAi was included as a positive control to account for RNAi efficiency. All RNAi clones were obtained from the Ahringer RNAi library.

Fluorescence imaging

Animals were anesthetized in M9 salt solution containing 40 mM sodium azide and mounted onto 2% agar pads. The animals were then visualized using a Leica M165 FC fluorescence stereomicroscope. The GFP signal from eight animals per condition was quantified via Image J software. The fluorescence of an entire animal was calculated with the following equation: corrected whole animal fluorescence = integrated density − (area of selected animal × mean fluorescence of background readings).

C. elegans killing assays with Pseudomonas aeruginosa

The bacterial lawns used for the C. elegans killing assays, performed to assess resistance to P. aeruginosa, were prepared by spreading 20 µL of P. aeruginosa PA14 culture grown overnight at 37 °C on the full surface of modified NGM agar plates (0.35% peptone instead of 0.25% peptone) in 3.5-cm diameter plates. The plates were incubated at 37 °C for 16 hours and then cooled to room temperature for at least 1 hour before being seeded with synchronized young adult animals. The killing assays were performed at 25 °C, and live animals were transferred daily to fresh plates. Survival was evaluated at the times indicated; animals were considered dead if they failed to respond to touch. Each experiment was performed in triplicate (n = 90 animals).

P. aeruginosa avoidance assay

The bacterial lawns were prepared by inoculating individual bacterial colonies into 3 mL of LB broth as mentioned above and growing them for 24 hours on a shaker at 37 °C. Then, 20 µL of the culture was plated onto the center of a 3.5-cm modified NGM plate (3.5% instead of 2.5% peptone) and incubated at 37 °C for 24 hours. Thirty synchronized young gravid adult hermaphrodites grown on E. coli OP50 were transferred outside the bacterial lawns and incubated at 25 °C. Then, the number of animals on and off the lawns were counted at the indicated times for each experiment. The occupancy index was calculated as (Non lawn/Ntotal). At least three independent experiments were performed, and three 3.5-cm plates were used per trial in each experiment.

Reversal assay

Young adult worms (N2, nhr-68(gk708), nhr-10(tm4695), and double mutants) were raised at 20 °C. Worms were first transferred to unseeded plates to remove residual bacteria and then placed on unseeded NGM plates. After 1-min acclimation, reversal events were counted over a 3-min period. A reversal was defined as at least two consecutive head bends during backward movement.

Locomotion analysis

Locomotion was assessed using an image-based assay in which C. elegans were transferred to plates containing a fresh bacterial lawn. A 15-s video was recorded immediately after transfer, and an image was captured at the 15-s time point. Movement distance was measured by tracing the worm’s movement track using NIH ImageJ, and locomotion was expressed as the ratio of movement distance to body length.

Choice assay with linoleic acid supplementation

A 10 mM linoleic acid (LA) stock was prepared by adding 1 µL of pure linoleic acid to 359 µL of 100% ethanol and vortexing thoroughly to ensure complete mixing. For the choice assay, a 200 µL bacterial suspension was prepared using 20× concentrated overnight E. coli or P. aeruginosa cultures, fatty-acid-free BSA (5 mg/mL stock), S basal or M9 buffer, and LA or vehicle control. For the LA condition, the mixture consisted of 20× concentrated bacteria (50%), BSA stock (50 mg/mL), buffer (29%), and LA stock (1%, final 100 µM). For the control condition, ethanol was added instead of LA at the same final concentration (1%), with all other components kept identical. Each mixture was vortexed briefly and equilibrated at room temperature before use. For the assay, 30 µL of each condition was spotted onto SK plates in symmetrical positions and allowed to dry prior to behavioral testing. Choice Index = (number of animals on E. coli + vehicle − number of animals on E. coli + LA)/(number of animals on E. coli + vehicle + number of animals on E. coli + LA). Choice indices for P. aeruginosa were calculated similarly.

Cloning and generation of transgenic C. elegans strains

For nhr-68 rescue, the recombinant plasmid pPD95.77_nhr-68p::nhr-68_SL2::gfp was constructed by cloning the nhr-68 gene and its 670-bp upstream sequence into the XbaI and SmaI sites of the pPD95.77_SL2::gfp vector [64]. For NHR-68 gut-specific rescue, the nhr-68-encoding sequence was amplified with the primers nhr-68_ATG_SaLI F and nhr-68_TAA_SmaI R. The amplified nhr-68 DNA was cloned under the vha-6 promoter in the plasmid pPD95.77_vha-6p_SL2 between the SalI and SmaI sites to generate the expression clone pPD95.77_vha-6p_nhr-68_SL2. Transgenic strains were created by injecting 25 ng/mL of the plasmids together with 50 ng/mL of the coinjection marker unc-122p::rfp.

C. elegans killing assays with Enterococcus faecalis

Twenty microliters of log-phase E. faecalis cultures were spread over the entire surface of 35 mm brain-heart infusion (BHI) agar plates, with or without 20 nM VB12. Plates were incubated overnight at 37 °C and then cooled to room temperature before seeding with synchronized young adult animals. Killing assays were performed at 25 °C, and live animals were transferred daily to fresh plates, with or without 20 nM VB12. Plates containing VB12 were protected from light. Survival was evaluated at the indicated time points; animals were considered dead if they failed to respond to touch. Each experiment was performed in triplicate (n = 90 animals).

RNA isolation and quantitative reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR)

Young gravid adult wild-type N2 and nhr-68(gk708) animals were either infected for 12 h with P. aeruginosa PA14 or fed on E. coli OP50 at 25 °C. After the exposure period, animals were collected, washed three times with M9 buffer, and immediately frozen in QIAzol reagent (Qiagen, the Netherlands). Total RNA was extracted using the RNeasy Plus Universal Kit (Qiagen, the Netherlands). A total of 6 µg of total RNA was reverse transcribed with random primers using a high-capacity cDNA reverse transcription kit (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA).

Quantitative reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR) was conducted using the Applied Biosystems one-step real-time PCR protocol with SYBR Green (Applied Biosystems) on a QuantStudio 5 Real-Time PCR System in 96-well plate format. Reaction mixtures of 25 µl were analyzed as outlined by the manufacturer (Applied Biosystems). The relative fold changes of the transcripts were calculated using the comparative cycle threshold (CT) (2−∆∆CT) method and normalized to pan-actin (act-1, act-3, and act-4). The cycle thresholds of the amplification were determined using QuantStudio 5 software (Applied Biosystems). All samples were run in triplicate. The primer sequences are listed in S7 Table.

RNA sequencing and gene expression analysis

RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) was performed for gene expression analysis and transcriptomic studies. Total RNA was isolated from wild-type N2 and nhr-68(gk708) animals infected for 12h with P. aeruginosa PA14 in three biological replicates. The sample integrity and purity were checked using an Agilent 2100 system. The RNA was sequenced on a HiSeq X sequencing platform with 150 bp paired-end reads. The RNA sequencing libraries were prepared via the NEBNextâ Ultra RNA Library Prep Kit for Illumina (NEB#E7530L). Library preparation and sequencing were performed at the Novogene Genomic Services & Solutions Company, USA.

The RNA sequence data were analyzed via Lasergene DNA star software. The RNA reads were aligned to the C. elegans genome (WS271) via the STAR aligner. Read counts were normalized for sequencing depth and RNA composition across all samples. Differential gene expression analysis was then performed on the normalized samples. Genes exhibiting at least a 2-fold change were considered differentially expressed. Gene enrichment of Gene Ontology (GO) biological processes was performed via the Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated Discovery (DAVID) (https://david.ncifcrf.gov/). The overlap of the upregulated genes in previously defined pathways and gene sets, including DAF-16-, PMK-1-, and SKN-1-regulated genes, was calculated. The statistical significance of the overlap between two gene sets was calculated with nemates.org/MA/progs/overlap_stats.html. The representation factor represents the number of overlapping genes divided by the expected number of overlapping genes drawn from 2 independent groups.

Extraction of metabolites for GC–MS

C. elegans pellets of 2000 animals were lyophilized, and 1.0 mg of biomass was weighed and transferred to a microcentrifuge tube. The metabolites were extracted via the MPLEx protocol [65], in brief, by the addition of 470 µl of a mixture of methanol:water (1.0:1.4), followed by homogenization with a pellet pestle and the addition of 530 µl of ice-cold chloroform. The samples were vortexed for 1 min, placed in an ice block for 5 min, and vortexed again. Centrifugation was performed at 4 °C for 10 min at 7,500g. The upper and lower layers containing polar and nonpolar metabolites were collected and transferred to glass vials, dried under vacuum, and stored at −20 °C. For metabolomic analysis, aex-5 RNAi animals were grown on E. coli HT115 and collected without P. aeruginosa exposure.

Derivatization and GC–MS acquisition

The vials containing the dried metabolite extracts were stored at −20 °C and dried in vacuo for an additional 30 min immediately prior to derivatization to ensure the complete removal of residual moisture. The dried extracts were chemically derivatized by adding 20 µL of a 30 mg/ml methoxamine hydrochloride solution in pyridine, followed by vortexing and sonication for 30 s. The samples were then incubated for 90 min in a thermomixer (Eppendorf) at 37 °C with shaking at 1,000 rpm. After this step was completed, the samples were silylated by adding 80 µL of N-methyl-N-trimethylsilyl-trifluoroacetamide (MSTFA) with 1% trimethylchlorosilane and incubation in a thermomixer at 37 °C for 30 min with shaking at 1,000 rpm.

The samples were analyzed with an Agilent GC 7890A instrument equipped with an HP-5MS column (30 m × 0.25 mm × 0.25 μm; Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA) coupled with a single quadrupole MSD 5975C (Agilent Technologies). The helium gas flow rate was determined by the Agilent Retention Time Locking (RTL) function on the basis of analysis of deuterated myristic acid (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA). One microliter of the derivatized sample was injected into a splitless port at a constant temperature of 250 °C. The GC temperature gradient started at 60 °C and was held at that temperature for 1 min after injection, followed by an increase to 325 °C at a rate of 10 °C/min and a 10-min hold at this temperature. The transfer line and quadrupole temperatures were 280 °C and 150 °C, respectively. The electron impact was set to 70 eV, and mass spectra were collected at a rate of 2.6 Hz over a scanning range of m/z 50–600. A fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) mixture (C8-28) (Sigma–Aldrich) was analyzed with each batch as a standard for retention time calibration.

GC–MS data analysis

Raw GC–MS data files were processed via Metabolite Detector software [66]. The retention indices (RIs) of the detected metabolites were calculated on the basis of the analysis of the FAME standards, followed by chromatographic alignment across all analyses after deconvolution. Metabolites were identified by matching experimental spectra to a PNNL-augmented version of the Agilent GC–MS Metabolomics Library, which contains mass spectra and validated RIs for over 1,200 metabolites. All metabolite identifications and quantification ions were manually confirmed to reduce deconvolution errors during automated data processing and to eliminate false identifications. The NIST20 and Wiley11 spectral libraries were also used to cross-validate the spectral matching scores obtained using the PNNL augmented library. The unknown peaks were subjected to further matching to the NIST20 and Wiley11 GC–MS libraries and reported as tentative identifications (denoted by an asterisk) if the MS score was high. The reported metabolite peak areas were normalized to the biomass used for extraction. A heatmap was generated using MetaboAnalyst 5.0 (https://www.metaboanalyst.ca/MetaboAnalyst/).

Analysis of fatty acids by LC–HRMS

Worm samples were homogenized in 300 µL of PBS. From each homogenate, 250 µL was mixed with 10 µL of internal standard (oleic acid-d17, 10 µg/mL) and saponified, followed by extraction with 4 mL of hexane. Extracts were vortexed for 10 min and centrifuged at 4,000g for 10 min at 4 °C. Supernatants were transferred to clean glass tubes and evaporated to dryness under nitrogen. Dried samples were reconstituted in 150 µL of isopropanol, and 5 µL was injected into a Thermo Vanquish LC system equipped with a Kinetex C18 column (2.1 × 100 mm, 2.6 µm). Mobile phase A was 0.1% formic acid in water, and mobile phase B was 80:20 acetonitrile:isopropanol. The flow rate was 300 µL/min at 35 °C, and fatty acids were separated over a 25-min gradient.

Data were acquired on a Thermo Orbitrap Lumos mass spectrometer in negative ESI mode at a resolution of 120,000 (scan range 100–500 m/z) and processed using Skyline-daily software.

Fatty acid treatment

Synchronized young adult animals were collected from NGM plates, washed twice with S basal buffer, and transferred to 6 cm dishes containing 5.8 mL of S basal supplemented with 0.02% NP-40 and 180 µL of an overnight E. coli OP50 culture. Linoleic acid (LA) or vaccenic acid (VA) was added to a final concentration of 100 µM from 100 mM ethanol stocks pre-mixed with 0.1% fatty acid-free bovine serum albumin (BSA) to enhance solubility and bioavailability [67]. Cultures were gently shaken at 60 rpm for 4 h at room temperature and protected from light. After incubation, animals were washed three times with S basal to remove residual fatty acids before subsequent behavioral assays. Control treatments contained equivalent amounts of ethanol and 0.1% BSA.

Quantification and statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed with GraphPad Prism 8 version 8.1.2 (GraphPad). All error bars represent the standard deviation (SD). Two-sample t tests were used for comparisons between two groups, while one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple-comparison test was applied for comparisons among three or more groups. P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. In the figures, asterisks (*) denote statistical significance as follows: ns, not significant; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001, compared with the appropriate controls. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to calculate the survival fractions, and the statistical significance of differences between survival curves was determined via the log-rank test. All experiments were performed at least three times.

Supporting information

S1 Appendix. Supplementary Figures A–J.

(DOCX)

pbio.3004026.s001.docx (1.4MB, docx)
S1 Table. Fluorescence Quantification of Screened NHR Genes.

(XLSX)

pbio.3004026.s002.xlsx (23.3KB, xlsx)
S2 Table. Upregulated and downregulated genes more than 2-fold (p < 0.05) in non-infected and P. aeruginosa-infected nhr-68(gk708) versus WT animals.

(XLSX)

pbio.3004026.s003.xlsx (471.9KB, xlsx)
S3 Table. GO enrichment analysis.

(XLSX)

pbio.3004026.s004.xlsx (25.5KB, xlsx)
S4 Table. Representation factors for upregulated genes in P. aeruginosa-infected nhr-68(gk708) animals.

(XLSX)

pbio.3004026.s005.xlsx (13.7KB, xlsx)
S5 Table. Metabolomic profiling and lipid quantification in NHR-68 pathway.

(XLSX)

pbio.3004026.s006.xlsx (85.8KB, xlsx)
S6 Table. Strains.

(XLSX)

pbio.3004026.s007.xlsx (9.9KB, xlsx)
S7 Table. Primers.

(XLSX)

pbio.3004026.s008.xlsx (9.8KB, xlsx)
S1 Data. Raw data.

(XLSX)

pbio.3004026.s009.xlsx (347.8KB, xlsx)

Acknowledgments

We thank current and former Aballay Lab members for insightful discussions. We thank Meagan Burnet and Nathalie Munoz (Biological Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352, USA) for their contributions to GC–MS analyses, including quality control and sample processing. Most strains used in this study were obtained from the Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (CGC), which is funded by the NIH Office of Research Infrastructure Programs (P40 OD010440) and the National BioResource Project (NBRP), Japan.

Abbreviations

BHI

brain-heart infusion

BSA

bovine serum albumin

CGC

Caenorhabditis Genetics Center

DAVID

Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated Discovery

EPA

eicosapentaenoic acid

FAME

fatty acid methyl ester

GO

Gene Ontology

IIS

insulin/IGF-1 signaling

LA

linoleic acid

LB

Luria–Bertani

MUFAs

monounsaturated fatty acids

NBRP

National BioResource Project

NGM

nematode growth medium retention indices

NHRs

Nuclear hormone receptors

PCA

Principal component analysis

PUFA

polyunsaturated fatty acid

RIs

retention indices

RTL

Retention Time Locking

SD

standard deviation

VA

vaccenic acid

Data Availability

The raw RNA-seq data have been deposited in the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database under accession number GSE344153. The raw GC-MS metabolomics data have been deposited in MassIVE under accession number: MSV000102834. The raw LC-HRMS metabolomics data have been deposited in the Metabolomics Workbench under study ID:ST005144. No custom code was generated for this study. All other underlying data for this study are available within the paper and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (GM070977 and AI117911 to AA). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Mangelsdorf DJ, Thummel C, Beato M, Herrlich P, Schütz G, Umesono K, et al. The nuclear receptor superfamily: the second decade. Cell. 1995;83(6):835–9. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90199-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.De Bosscher K, Desmet SJ, Clarisse D, Estébanez-Perpiña E, Brunsveld L. Nuclear receptor crosstalk - defining the mechanisms for therapeutic innovation. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2020;16(7):363–77. doi: 10.1038/s41574-020-0349-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Sang Y, Ren J, Aballay A. A gut-activated NHR-86-CYP pathway mediates the neuroprotective effects of Enterococcus faecium probiotics in a nematode model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. PLoS Biol. 2026;24(1):e3003627. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3003627 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Goh GYS, Winter JJ, Bhanshali F, Doering KRS, Lai R, Lee K, et al. NHR-49/HNF4 integrates regulation of fatty acid metabolism with a protective transcriptional response to oxidative stress and fasting. Aging Cell. 2018;17(3):e12743. doi: 10.1111/acel.12743 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Chamoli M, Singh A, Malik Y, Mukhopadhyay A. A novel kinase regulates dietary restriction-mediated longevity in Caenorhabditis elegans. Aging Cell. 2014;13(4):641–55. doi: 10.1111/acel.12218 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Doering KRS, Cheng X, Milburn L, Ratnappan R, Ghazi A, Miller DL, et al. Nuclear hormone receptor NHR-49 acts in parallel with HIF-1 to promote hypoxia adaptation in Caenorhabditis elegans. Elife. 2022;11:e67911. doi: 10.7554/eLife.67911 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wani KA, Goswamy D, Taubert S, Ratnappan R, Ghazi A, Irazoqui JE. NHR-49/PPAR-α and HLH-30/TFEB cooperate for C. elegans host defense via a flavin-containing monooxygenase. Elife. 2021;10:e62775. doi: 10.7554/eLife.62775 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Naim N, Amrit FRG, Ratnappan R, DelBuono N, Loose JA, Ghazi A. Cell nonautonomous roles of NHR-49 in promoting longevity and innate immunity. Aging Cell. 2021;20(7):e13413. doi: 10.1111/acel.13413 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Dasgupta M, Shashikanth M, Gupta A, Sandhu A, De A, Javed S, et al. NHR-49 Transcription factor regulates immunometabolic response and survival of Caenorhabditis elegans during Enterococcus faecalis infection. Infect Immun. 2020;88(8):e00130-20. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00130-20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Peterson ND, Cheesman HK, Liu P, Anderson SM, Foster KJ, Chhaya R, et al. The nuclear hormone receptor NHR-86 controls anti-pathogen responses in C. elegans. PLoS Genet. 2019;15(1):e1007935. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1007935 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Nasrallah MA, Peterson ND, Szumel ES, Liu P, Page AL, Tse SY, et al. Transcriptional suppression of sphingolipid catabolism controls pathogen resistance in C. elegans. PLoS Pathog. 2023;19(10):e1011730. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1011730 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Peterson ND, Tse SY, Huang QJ, Wani KA, Schiffer CA, Pukkila-Worley R. Non-canonical pattern recognition of a pathogen-derived metabolite by a nuclear hormone receptor identifies virulent bacteria in C. elegans. Immunity. 2023;56(4):768–82 e9. Epub 20230217. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2023.01.027 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Maglich JM, Sluder A, Guan X, Shi Y, McKee DD, Carrick K, et al. Comparison of complete nuclear receptor sets from the human, Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila genomes. Genome Biol. 2001;2(8):RESEARCH0029. doi: 10.1186/gb-2001-2-8-research0029 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Liu CC, Seban N, Srinivasan S. RiboTRAP-seq identifies spatially distinct functions for the anterior and posterior intestine in immune and metabolic regulation in C. elegans. bioRxiv. 2025. doi: 10.1101/2025.10.03.680215 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Liu C-C, Khan A, Seban N, Littlejohn N, Shah A, Srinivasan S. A homeostatic gut-to-brain insulin antagonist restrains neuronally stimulated fat loss. Nat Commun. 2024;15(1):6869. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-51077-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.O’Donnell MP, Fox BW, Chao P-H, Schroeder FC, Sengupta P. A neurotransmitter produced by gut bacteria modulates host sensory behaviour. Nature. 2020;583(7816):415–20. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2395-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Nono M, Kishimoto S, Sato-Carlton A, Carlton PM, Nishida E, Uno M. Intestine-to-germline transmission of epigenetic information intergenerationally ensures systemic stress resistance in C. elegans. Cell Rep. 2020;30(10):3207–17 e4.doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.02.050 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Zhang Y, Lu H, Bargmann CI. Pathogenic bacteria induce aversive olfactory learning in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature. 2005;438(7065):179–84. doi: 10.1038/nature04216 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Singh J, Aballay A. Intestinal infection regulates behavior and learning via neuroendocrine signaling. Elife. 2019;8:e50033. doi: 10.7554/eLife.50033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Filipowicz A, Lalsiamthara J, Aballay A. TRPM channels mediate learned pathogen avoidance following intestinal distention. Elife. 2021;10:e65935. doi: 10.7554/eLife.65935 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Van Gilst MR, Hadjivassiliou H, Jolly A, Yamamoto KR. Nuclear hormone receptor NHR-49 controls fat consumption and fatty acid composition in C. elegans. PLoS Biol. 2005;3(2):e53. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030053 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Pathare PP, Lin A, Bornfeldt KE, Taubert S, Van Gilst MR. Coordinate regulation of lipid metabolism by novel nuclear receptor partnerships. PLoS Genet. 2012;8(4):e1002645. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002645 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Watts JL. Fat synthesis and adiposity regulation in Caenorhabditis elegans. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2009;20(2):58–65. doi: 10.1016/j.tem.2008.11.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Lesa GM, Palfreyman M, Hall DH, Clandinin MT, Rudolph C, Jorgensen EM, et al. Long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids are required for efficient neurotransmission in C. elegans. J Cell Sci. 2003;116(Pt 24):4965–75. doi: 10.1242/jcs.00918 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Desbois AP, Lawlor KC. Antibacterial activity of long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids against Propionibacterium acnes and Staphylococcus aureus. Mar Drugs. 2013;11(11):4544–57. doi: 10.3390/md11114544 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Anderson SM, Cheesman HK, Peterson ND, Salisbury JE, Soukas AA, Pukkila-Worley R. The fatty acid oleate is required for innate immune activation and pathogen defense in Caenorhabditis elegans. PLoS Pathog. 2019;15(6):e1007893. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1007893 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Nandakumar M, Tan M-W. Gamma-linolenic and stearidonic acids are required for basal immunity in Caenorhabditis elegans through their effects on p38 MAP kinase activity. PLoS Genet. 2008;4(11):e1000273. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000273 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Mokoena NZ, Steyn H, Hugo A, Dix-Peek T, Dickens C, Gcilitshana OMN, et al. Eicosapentaenoic acid influences the pathogenesis of Candida albicans in Caenorhabditis elegans via inhibition of hyphal formation and stimulation of the host immune response. Med Microbiol Immunol. 2023;212(5):349–68. doi: 10.1007/s00430-023-00777-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Watts JL, Browse J. Genetic dissection of polyunsaturated fatty acid synthesis in Caenorhabditis elegans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99(9):5854–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.092064799 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Deline ML, Vrablik TL, Watts JL. Dietary supplementation of polyunsaturated fatty acids in Caenorhabditis elegans. J Vis Exp. 2013;(81):50879. doi: 10.3791/50879 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Fraser AG, Kamath RS, Zipperlen P, Martinez-Campos M, Sohrmann M, Ahringer J. Functional genomic analysis of C. elegans chromosome I by systematic RNA interference. Nature. 2000;408(6810):325–30. doi: 10.1038/35042517 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Singh J, Aballay A. Microbial colonization activates an immune fight-and-flight response via neuroendocrine signaling. Dev Cell. 2019;49(1):89-99.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2019.02.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Irazoqui JE, Ng A, Xavier RJ, Ausubel FM. Role for beta-catenin and HOX transcription factors in Caenorhabditis elegans and mammalian host epithelial-pathogen interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(45):17469–74. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0809527105 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Ren J, Sang Y, Aballay A. Cholinergic receptor-Wnt pathway controls immune activation by sensing intestinal dysfunction. Cell Rep. 2022;41(5):111575. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2022.111575 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Arda HE, Taubert S, MacNeil LT, Conine CC, Tsuda B, Van Gilst M, et al. Functional modularity of nuclear hormone receptors in a Caenorhabditis elegans metabolic gene regulatory network. Mol Syst Biol. 2010;6:367. doi: 10.1038/msb.2010.23 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Bulcha JT, Giese GE, Ali MZ, Lee Y-U, Walker MD, Holdorf AD, et al. A persistence detector for metabolic network rewiring in an animal. Cell Rep. 2019;26(2):460-468.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.12.064 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Chang HC, Paek J, Kim DH. Natural polymorphisms in C. elegans HECW-1 E3 ligase affect pathogen avoidance behaviour. Nature. 2011;480(7378):525–9. doi: 10.1038/nature10643 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Kaletsky R, Moore RS, Vrla GD, Parsons LR, Gitai Z, Murphy CT. C. elegans interprets bacterial non-coding RNAs to learn pathogenic avoidance. Nature. 2020;586(7829):445–51. Epub 20200909. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2699-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Reece-Hoyes JS, Shingles J, Dupuy D, Grove CA, Walhout AJM, Vidal M, et al. Insight into transcription factor gene duplication from Caenorhabditis elegans Promoterome-driven expression patterns. BMC Genomics. 2007;8:27. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-8-27 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Crespo A, Blanco-Cabra N, Torrents E. Aerobic vitamin B(12) biosynthesis is essential for Pseudomonas aeruginosa class II ribonucleotide reductase activity during planktonic and biofilm growth. Front Microbiol. 2018;9:986. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00986 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Balabanova L, Averianova L, Marchenok M, Son O, Tekutyeva L. Microbial and genetic resources for Cobalamin (Vitamin B12) biosynthesis: from ecosystems to industrial biotechnology. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(9):4522. 10.3390/ijms22094522 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Dennis G, Sherman BT, Hosack DA, Yang J, Gao W, Lane HC, et al. DAVID: database for annotation, visualization, and integrated discovery. Genome Biol. 2003;4(5):P3. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Zhang H, Li X, Song D, Yukselen O, Nanda S, Kucukural A, et al. Worm Perturb-Seq: massively parallel whole-animal RNAi and RNA-seq. Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):4785. doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-60154-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Magner DB, Wollam J, Shen Y, Hoppe C, Li D, Latza C, et al. The NHR-8 nuclear receptor regulates cholesterol and bile acid homeostasis in C. elegans. Cell Metab. 2013;18(2):212–24. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2013.07.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.O’Halloran DM, Altshuler-Keylin S, Lee JI, L’Etoile ND. Regulators of AWC-mediated olfactory plasticity in Caenorhabditis elegans. PLoS Genet. 2009;5(12):e1000761. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000761 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Calixto A, Chelur D, Topalidou I, Chen X, Chalfie M. Enhanced neuronal RNAi in C. elegans using SID-1. Nat Methods. 2010;7(7):554–9. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1463 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Zhang C, Montgomery TA, Fischer SEJ, Garcia SMDA, Riedel CG, Fahlgren N, et al. The Caenorhabditis elegans RDE-10/RDE-11 complex regulates RNAi by promoting secondary siRNA amplification. Curr Biol. 2012;22(10):881–90. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.04.011 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Allman E, Johnson D, Nehrke K. Loss of the apical V-ATPase a-subunit VHA-6 prevents acidification of the intestinal lumen during a rhythmic behavior in C. elegans. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2009;297(5):C1071-81. doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.00284.2009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Horikawa M, Sakamoto K. Fatty-acid metabolism is involved in stress-resistance mechanisms of Caenorhabditis elegans. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2009;390(4):1402–7. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2009.11.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Schretter CE. Links between the gut microbiota, metabolism, and host behavior. Gut Microbes. 2020;11(2):245–8. doi: 10.1080/19490976.2019.1643674 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Lemieux GA, Yoo S, Lin L, Vohra M, Ashrafi K. The steroid hormone ADIOL promotes learning by reducing neural kynurenic acid levels. Genes Dev. 2023;37(21–24):998–1016. doi: 10.1101/gad.350745.123 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Tsai SH, Wu YC, Palomino DF, Schroeder FC, Pan CL. Peripheral peroxisomal beta-oxidation engages neuronal serotonin signaling to drive stress-induced aversive memory in C. elegans. Cell Rep. 2024;43(4):113996. Epub 20240324. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2024.113996 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Wu Y-C, Beets I, Fox BW, Fajardo Palomino D, Chen L, Liao C-P, et al. Intercellular sphingolipid signaling mediates aversive learning in C. elegans. Curr Biol. 2025;35(10):2323-2336.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2025.03.082 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Zhou S, Novak KE, Kaletsky R, Weng Y, Ange JS, Stevenson ME, et al. Body-to-brain insulin and Notch signaling regulates memory through neuronal CREB activity. Nat Aging. 2025;5(7):1232–48. doi: 10.1038/s43587-025-00873-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Evans EA, Chen WC, Tan M-W. The DAF-2 insulin-like signaling pathway independently regulates aging and immunity in C. elegans. Aging Cell. 2008;7(6):879–93. doi: 10.1111/j.1474-9726.2008.00435.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Oliveira RP, Porter Abate J, Dilks K, Landis J, Ashraf J, Murphy CT, et al. Condition-adapted stress and longevity gene regulation by Caenorhabditis elegans SKN-1/Nrf. Aging Cell. 2009;8(5):524–41. doi: 10.1111/j.1474-9726.2009.00501.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Calder PC. n-3 PUFA and inflammation: from membrane to nucleus and from bench to bedside. Proc Nutr Soc. 2020;:1–13. doi: 10.1017/S0029665120007077 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Oppedisano F, Macrì R, Gliozzi M, Musolino V, Carresi C, Maiuolo J, et al. The anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties of n-3 PUFAs: their role in cardiovascular protection. Biomedicines. 2020;8(9):306. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines8090306 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Watts JL, Browse J. Dietary manipulation implicates lipid signaling in the regulation of germ cell maintenance in C. elegans. Dev Biol. 2006;292(2):381–92. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2006.01.013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Carabotti M, Scirocco A, Maselli MA, Severi C. The gut-brain axis: Interactions between enteric microbiota, central and enteric nervous systems. Ann Gastroenterol. 2015;28(2):203–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Ashique S, Mohanto S, Ahmed MG, Mishra N, Garg A, Chellappan DK, et al. Gut-brain axis: A cutting-edge approach to target neurological disorders and potential synbiotic application. Heliyon. 2024;10(13):e34092. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34092 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
  • 62.Sun X, Shukla M, Wang W, Li S. Unlocking gut-liver-brain axis communication metabolites: Energy metabolism, immunity and barriers. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes. 2024;10(1):136. doi: 10.1038/s41522-024-00610-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Timmons L, Fire A. Specific interference by ingested dsRNA. Nature. 1998;395(6705):854. doi: 10.1038/27579 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Cao X, Kajino-Sakamoto R, Doss A, Aballay A. Distinct roles of sensory neurons in mediating pathogen avoidance and neuropeptide-dependent immune regulation. Cell Rep. 2017;21(6):1442–51. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.10.050 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Nakayasu ES, Nicora CD, Sims AC, Burnum-Johnson KE, Kim Y-M, Kyle JE, et al. MPLEx: A robust and universal protocol for single-sample integrative proteomic, metabolomic, and lipidomic analyses. mSystems. 2016;1(3):e00043-16. doi: 10.1128/mSystems.00043-16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Hiller K, Hangebrauk J, Jäger C, Spura J, Schreiber K, Schomburg D. MetaboliteDetector: Comprehensive analysis tool for targeted and nontargeted GC/MS based metabolome analysis. Anal Chem. 2009;81(9):3429–39. doi: 10.1021/ac802689c [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Elle IC, Rødkær SV, Fredens J, Færgeman NJ. A method for measuring fatty acid oxidation in C. elegans. Worm. 2012;1(1):26–30. doi: 10.4161/worm.19564 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Lucas Smith

30 Jun 2026

Dear Dr Sang,

Thank you for submitting your revised manuscript entitled "Intestinal lipid metabolism controls immune response through NHR-68 and gut–brain signaling in C. elegans" for consideration as a Research Article by PLOS Biology. I have now had a chance to discuss your revision with the Academic Editor, and I am writing to let you know that we would like to send your submission back to the original reviewers for another look.

However, before we can send your manuscript to reviewers, we need you to complete your submission by providing the metadata that is required for full assessment. To this end, please login to Editorial Manager where you will find the paper in the 'Submissions Needing Revisions' folder on your homepage. Please click 'Revise Submission' from the Action Links and complete all additional questions in the submission questionnaire.

Once your full submission is complete, your paper will undergo a series of checks in preparation for peer review. After your manuscript has passed the checks it will be sent out for review. To provide the metadata for your submission, please Login to Editorial Manager (https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology) within two working days, i.e. by Jul 02 2026 11:59PM.

Feel free to email us at plosbiology@plos.org if you have any queries relating to your submission.

Kind regards,

Luke

Lucas Smith, Ph.D.

Senior Editor

PLOS Biology

lsmith@plos.org

Decision Letter 1

Lucas Smith

4 Aug 2026

Dear Dr Sang,

Thank you for your patience while we considered your revised manuscript "Intestinal lipid metabolism controls immune response through NHR-68 and gut–brain signaling in C. elegans" for consideration as a Research Article at PLOS Biology. Your revised study has now been evaluated by the PLOS Biology editors, the Academic Editor and by two of the original reviewers.

In light of the reviews, which you will find at the end of this email, we are pleased to offer you the opportunity to address the remaining points from the reviewers in a revision that we anticipate should not take you very long. We will then assess your revised manuscript and your response to the reviewers' comments with our Academic Editor aiming to avoid further rounds of peer-review, although we might need to consult with the reviewers, depending on the nature of the revisions.

In addition to these revisions, please be sure to also respond to our editorial requests, which are appended below the reviews.

You may also need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests shortly. If you do not receive a separate email within a few days, please assume that checks have been completed, and no additional changes are required.

We expect to receive your revised manuscript within 1 month. Please email us (plosbiology@plos.org) if you have any questions or concerns, or would like to request an extension.

At this stage, your manuscript remains formally under active consideration at our journal; please notify us by email if you do not intend to submit a revision so that we withdraw the manuscript.

**IMPORTANT - SUBMITTING YOUR REVISION**

Your revisions should address the specific points made by each reviewer. Please submit the following files along with your revised manuscript:

1. A 'Response to Reviewers' file - this should detail your responses to the editorial requests, present a point-by-point response to all of the reviewers' comments, and indicate the changes made to the manuscript.

*NOTE: In your point-by-point response to the reviewers, please provide the full context of each review. Do not selectively quote paragraphs or sentences to reply to. The entire set of reviewer comments should be present in full and each specific point should be responded to individually.

You should also cite any additional relevant literature that has been published since the original submission and mention any additional citations in your response.

2. In addition to a clean copy of the manuscript, please also upload a 'track-changes' version of your manuscript that specifies the edits made. This should be uploaded as a "Revised Article with Changes Highlighted " file type.

*Resubmission Checklist*

When you are ready to resubmit your revised manuscript, please refer to this resubmission checklist: https://plos.io/Biology_Checklist

To submit a revised version of your manuscript, please go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/ and log in as an Author. Click the link labelled 'Submissions Needing Revision' where you will find your submission record.

Please make sure to read the following important policies and guidelines while preparing your revision:

*Published Peer Review*

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. Please see here for more details:

https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/05/plos-journals-now-open-for-published-peer-review/

*PLOS Data Policy*

Please note that as a condition of publication PLOS' data policy (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/data-availability) requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions arrived at in your manuscript. If you have not already done so, you must include any data used in your manuscript either in appropriate repositories, within the body of the manuscript, or as supporting information (N.B. this includes any numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.). For an example see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5

*Blot and Gel Data Policy*

We require the original, uncropped and minimally adjusted images supporting all blot and gel results reported in an article's figures or Supporting Information files. We will require these files before a manuscript can be accepted so please prepare them now, if you have not already uploaded them. Please carefully read our guidelines for how to prepare and upload this data: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements

*Protocols deposition*

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Thank you again for your submission to our journal. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive thus far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Luke

Lucas Smith, Ph.D.

Senior Editor

PLOS Biology

lsmith@plos.org

----------------------------------------------------------------

REVIEWS:

Reviewer #3: The authors had addressed some of my comments with additional experiments (major comments 1, 5, 7 and 9) or explanation (major comments 6, 8; minor comments 1, 4 and 6). They did not address major comments 2, 3 and 4, considering them to be out of the study scope. They also missed minor comments 3 and 5. Overall, with these partial revisions, the manuscript was improved so that the new findings and limitation in interpretation were both presented clearly. Below are some comments that the authors could further consider.

1. Figure 4G: Is the level of LA significantly increased under Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection? Data here is shown in colors but the authors should use a more quantitative format to present these results, and perform statistical analysis to explore whether LA levels with Pseudomonas infection are significantly higher than those in the control animals.

2 For my major comment 9, the authors only quantified reversals for the nhr-10 and nhr-68 mutants, as well as those for the double mutant. The locomotion speed should also be evaluated.

3. I still think it better to incorporate the data of Figure 3D Figure into Figure 3E and 3F.

4. I do not agree that "immune response" in the title includes behavioral avoidance. This is certainly authors' personal take and not the standard practice of the field.

Reviewer #4: The authors have satisfactorily addressed all of my specific concerns in this revision. Minor note - the revised manuscript results refers to an intestine specific function of nhr-68 prior to presenting the intestinal rescue in figure 6. e.g. line 397 "AWC functions…downstream of intestinal metabolic regulation." I would suggest rephrasing for clarity before publication.

EDITORIAL REQUESTS

1) FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES: Please update the financial disclosures statement in our online editorial manager system to indicate whether the sponsors or funders played any role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

2) DATA: You may be aware of the PLOS Data Policy, which requires that all data be made available without restriction: http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/data-availability. For more information, please also see this editorial: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001797

>>Please upload all raw RNA-seq and mass spec (GC-MS and LC-HRMS) data to publicly available repositories.

Note that for other figures we do not require all raw data. Rather, we ask that all individual quantitative observations that underlie the data summarized in the figures and results of your paper be made available in one of the following forms:

a. Supplementary files (e.g., excel). Please ensure that all data files are uploaded as 'Supporting Information' and are invariably referred to (in the manuscript, figure legends, and the Description field when uploading your files) using the following format verbatim: S1 Data, S2 Data, etc. Multiple panels of a single or even several figures can be included as multiple sheets in one excel file that is saved using exactly the following convention: S1_Data.xlsx (using an underscore).

b. Deposition in a publicly available repository. Please also provide the accession code or a reviewer link so that we may view your data before publication.

>>Regardless of the method selected, please ensure that you provide the individual numerical values that underlie the summary data displayed in your figures (including supplemental)

NOTE: the numerical data provided should include all replicates AND the way in which the plotted mean and errors were derived (it should not present only the mean/average values).

>>Please also ensure that figure legends in your manuscript include information on where the underlying data can be found, and ensure your supplemental data file/s has a legend.

>>Please ensure that your Data Statement in the submission system accurately describes where your data can be found.

3) DATA PRESENTATION: Please ensure that you are using best practice for statistical reporting and data presentation. These are our guidelines https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting#loc-statistical-reporting and a useful resource on data presentation https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002128

>>If you are reporting experiments where n ≤ 5, please plot each individual data point.\

4) CODE: Per journal policy, if you have generated any custom code during the course of this investigation, please make it available without restrictions. Please ensure that the code is sufficiently well documented and reusable, and that your Data Statement in the Editorial Manager submission system accurately describes where your code can be found. More information on our Code Policy, what and how to share can be found here: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/code-availability

Please note that we cannot accept sole deposition of code in GitHub, as this could be changed after publication. However, you can archive this version of your publicly available GitHub code to Zenodo. Once you do this, it will generate a DOI number, which you will need to provide in the Data Accessibility Statement (you are welcome to also provide the GitHub access information). See the process for doing this here: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/archiving-a-github-repository/referencing-and-citing-content

Decision Letter 2

Lucas Smith

28 Aug 2026

Dear Dr Sang,

Thank you for your patience while we considered your revised manuscript "Intestinal lipid metabolism controls molecular and behavioral immunity through NHR-68 and gut–brain signaling in C. elegans" for publication as a Research Article at PLOS Biology. This revised version of your manuscript has been evaluated by the PLOS Biology editors and the Academic Editor, who is satisfied by the changes made in response to the last round of review.

Based on our Academic Editor's assessment of your revision we are likely to accept this manuscript for publication. However before we can accept your study we need you to address a number of last editorial requests, which I think may have been missed in my previous decision letter. These are detailed below.

**IMPORTANT - Please address the following editorial requests.

1) DATA: In my last email, I asked that you please upload all raw RNA-seq and mass spec (GC-MS and LC-HRMS) data to publicly available repositories. Looking through the revision, I could not find your response to this request, or any accession numbers. Did I miss them somewhere? If not, please upload the raw data (ex FASTQ files, vendor raw files and open-format converted files) together with the metadata needed to reproduce the processing for all samples profiled by these techniques, as that is standard practice in the field, and is needed to meet our data reporting policy (http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/data-availability)

2) DATA: In addition to the data requested above, for the rest of the figures presented in your study we ask that you provide the individual quantitative observations that underlie the presented data. This can be made available in the following forms:

a. Supplementary files (e.g., excel). Please ensure that all data files are uploaded as 'Supporting Information' and are invariably referred to (in the manuscript, figure legends, and the Description field when uploading your files) using the following format verbatim: S1 Data, S2 Data, etc. Multiple panels of a single or even several figures can be included as multiple sheets in one excel file that is saved using exactly the following convention: S1_Data.xlsx (using an underscore).

b. Deposition in a publicly available repository. Please also provide the accession code or a reviewer link so that we may view your data before publication.

>>Regardless of the method selected, please ensure that you provide the individual numerical values that underlie the summary data displayed in the following figures:

Fig 1B-D; Fig 2B-D; Fig 3C-E; Fig C-J; Fig 5A-H; Fig 6A-H;

Fig S1; Fig S2A-D; Fig S3A-B; Fig S6; Fig S7; Fig S8l Fig S9; Fig S10

NOTE: the numerical data provided should include all replicates AND the way in which the plotted mean and errors were derived (it should not present only the mean/average values).

>>Please also ensure that figure legends in your manuscript include information on where the underlying data can be found, and ensure your supplemental data file/s has a legend.

>>Please ensure that your Data Statement in the submission system accurately describes where your data can be found.

^re: this request, I do see that your study does have some supplemental tables that may include relevant data, but I had trouble finding most of the underlying data (so I apologize if I missed some of the data already).

3) DATA PRESENTATION: In my previous email I asked that 'if you are reporting experiments where n ≤ 5, please plot each individual data point' - however I noticed a few figures that do not meet this requirement. So please do take a moment to double check that your figures meet the best practice for statistical reporting and data presentation. These are our guidelines https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting#loc-statistical-reporting and a useful resource on data presentation https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002128

When checking this point, I also saw a few figure legends where the 'n's seemed to be missing, and so I would encourage you to do a final check the figure legends (including supplemental) to make sure they contain all the relevant details about sample size and stats, etc.

4) CODE: I also did not see your response to my request for code - so I am re-iterating it here, in case you generated any code in this study:

Per journal policy, if you have generated any custom code during the course of this investigation, please make it available without restrictions. Please ensure that the code is sufficiently well documented and reusable, and that your Data Statement in the Editorial Manager submission system accurately describes where your code can be found. More information on our Code Policy, what and how to share can be found here: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/code-availability

Please note that we cannot accept sole deposition of code in GitHub, as this could be changed after publication. However, you can archive this version of your publicly available GitHub code to Zenodo. Once you do this, it will generate a DOI number, which you will need to provide in the Data Accessibility Statement (you are welcome to also provide the GitHub access information). See the process for doing this here: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/archiving-a-github-repository/referencing-and-citing-content

As you address these items, please take this last chance to review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the cover letter that accompanies your revised manuscript.

In addition to these revisions, you may need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests shortly. If you do not receive a separate email within a few days, please assume that checks have been completed, and no additional changes are required.

We expect to receive your revised manuscript within two weeks.

To submit your revision, please go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/ and log in as an Author. Click the link labelled 'Submissions Needing Revision' to find your submission record. Your revised submission must include the following:

- a cover letter that should detail your responses to any editorial requests, if applicable, and whether changes have been made to the reference list

- a Response to Reviewers file that provides a detailed response to the reviewers' comments (if applicable, if not applicable please do not delete your existing 'Response to Reviewers' file.)

- a track-changes file indicating any changes that you have made to the manuscript.

NOTE: If Supporting Information files are included with your article, note that these are not copyedited and will be published as they are submitted. Please ensure that these files are legible and of high quality (at least 300 dpi) in an easily accessible file format. For this reason, please be aware that any references listed in an SI file will not be indexed. For more information, see our Supporting Information guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/s/supporting-information

*Published Peer Review History*

Please note that you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. Please see here for more details:

https://plos.org/published-peer-review-history/

*Press*

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, please ensure you have opted out of Early Article Posting on the submission form. We ask that you notify us as soon as possible if you or your institution is planning to press release the article.

*Protocols deposition*

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Luke

Lucas Smith, Ph.D.

Senior Editor

lsmith@plos.org

PLOS Biology

Decision Letter 3

Lucas Smith

14 Sep 2026

Dear Dr Sang,

Thank you for the submission of your revised Research Article "Intestinal lipid metabolism controls molecular and behavioral immunity through NHR-68 and gut–brain signaling in C. elegans" for publication in PLOS Biology and thank you for addressing our last editorial requests in this revision. On behalf of my colleagues and the Academic Editor, Mark J Alkema , I am pleased to say that we can in principle accept your manuscript for publication, provided you address any remaining formatting and reporting issues. These will be detailed in an email you should receive within 2-3 business days from our colleagues in the journal operations team; no action is required from you until then. Please note that we will not be able to formally accept your manuscript and schedule it for publication until you have completed any requested changes.

**IMPORTANT- In addition to addressing any production requests, to come, please be sure to address the following editorial requests.

1) As discussed over email, I have updated your submission to include the updated S1_data and supporting figures files that you provided me. Please take a moment to look through your submission to make sure the changes all look OK.

2) I have also taken the liberty of updating the data and code availability statement, in our online editorial manager system, to include the version that you provided in your manuscript, as the online version is the one that will be published with your paper. Note, I slightly tweaked it, so please make sure the statement also looks good to you. It reads:

The raw RNA-seq data have been deposited in the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database under accession number GSE344153.

The raw GC-MS metabolomics data have been deposited in MassIVE under accession number: MSV000102834.

The raw LC-HRMS metabolomics data have been deposited in the Metabolomics Workbench under study ID:ST005144.

No custom code was generated for this study.

All other underlying data for this study are available within the paper and its Supporting Information files

3) Please update the figure legend for supplemental figure 1 to include the statement "The underlying data for this figure can be found in S1 data."

4) As discussed over email, please do update all figures, excluding lifespan panels, (but including the supplemental figures) with n ≤ 5 to show the individual data points. I will ask the production team to loop me in once this change is made.

Please take a minute to log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pbiology/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information to ensure an efficient production process.

PRESS

We frequently collaborate with press offices. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximise its impact. If the press office is planning to promote your findings, we would be grateful if they could coordinate with biologypress@plos.org. If you have previously opted in to the early version process, we ask that you notify us immediately of any press plans so that we may opt out on your behalf.

We also ask that you take this opportunity to read our Embargo Policy regarding the discussion, promotion and media coverage of work that is yet to be published by PLOS. As your manuscript is not yet published, it is bound by the conditions of our Embargo Policy. Please be aware that this policy is in place both to ensure that any press coverage of your article is fully substantiated and to provide a direct link between such coverage and the published work. For full details of our Embargo Policy, please visit http://www.plos.org/about/media-inquiries/embargo-policy/.

Thank you again for choosing PLOS Biology for publication and supporting Open Access publishing. We look forward to publishing your study.

Sincerely,

Luke

Lucas Smith, Ph.D.

Senior Editor

PLOS Biology

lsmith@plos.org

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Appendix. Supplementary Figures A–J.

    (DOCX)

    pbio.3004026.s001.docx (1.4MB, docx)
    S1 Table. Fluorescence Quantification of Screened NHR Genes.

    (XLSX)

    pbio.3004026.s002.xlsx (23.3KB, xlsx)
    S2 Table. Upregulated and downregulated genes more than 2-fold (p < 0.05) in non-infected and P. aeruginosa-infected nhr-68(gk708) versus WT animals.

    (XLSX)

    pbio.3004026.s003.xlsx (471.9KB, xlsx)
    S3 Table. GO enrichment analysis.

    (XLSX)

    pbio.3004026.s004.xlsx (25.5KB, xlsx)
    S4 Table. Representation factors for upregulated genes in P. aeruginosa-infected nhr-68(gk708) animals.

    (XLSX)

    pbio.3004026.s005.xlsx (13.7KB, xlsx)
    S5 Table. Metabolomic profiling and lipid quantification in NHR-68 pathway.

    (XLSX)

    pbio.3004026.s006.xlsx (85.8KB, xlsx)
    S6 Table. Strains.

    (XLSX)

    pbio.3004026.s007.xlsx (9.9KB, xlsx)
    S7 Table. Primers.

    (XLSX)

    pbio.3004026.s008.xlsx (9.8KB, xlsx)
    S1 Data. Raw data.

    (XLSX)

    pbio.3004026.s009.xlsx (347.8KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Point-by-point response .docx

    pbio.3004026.s010.docx (55.9KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Point-by-point_response__auresp_1.docx

    pbio.3004026.s011.docx (55.9KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    pbio.3004026.s012.docx (17.6KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    The raw RNA-seq data have been deposited in the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database under accession number GSE344153. The raw GC-MS metabolomics data have been deposited in MassIVE under accession number: MSV000102834. The raw LC-HRMS metabolomics data have been deposited in the Metabolomics Workbench under study ID:ST005144. No custom code was generated for this study. All other underlying data for this study are available within the paper and its Supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS Biology are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES