Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jul 2.
Published in final edited form as: Neuron. 2014 Jul 2;83(1):164–177. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.05.006

Figure 6. The feeding phenotype of a putative feeding command neuron (FDG) is different from DSOG1 inactivation.

Figure 6

A. Flies with NP883-Gal4 neurons activated with dTRPA1 (32°C, green) showed mild consumption under fed conditions. Deprived controls are shown as a reference. In contrast, 98-Gal4, UAS-Kir2.1 flies consumed ∼150s. n=20 flies/genotype, each data point is one fly; mean±SEM; t-test to NP883-dTRPA1 (22°C); **p<0.01.

B. Spontaneous proboscis extensions were observed in NP883-Gal4, UAS-dTRPA1 flies upon dTRPA1 activation (32°C). n=20 flies/genotype; mean±SEM; t-test to NP883-Gal4, UAS-dTRPA1 (22°C); ***p<0.001.

C. The consumption of NP883-Gal4, UAS-dTRPA1 flies was not significantly different when 98-Gal4 neurons were also activated (green bars), with the exception of the water response. n=20-22 flies; mean±SEM; t-test to NP883-dTRPA1 (22°C); *p<0.05.

D. Consumption of 98-Gal4, UAS-Kir2.1 flies was not different when NP883-Gal4 neurons were also inactivated (red bars), demonstrating that the putative feeding command neuron is dispensable for the DSOG1 overconsumption phenotype. n=10-22 flies; mean±SEM; t-test to NP883-Kir2.1 (22°C); ***p<0.001. See Fiugre S5 for feeding phenotypes of a second Gal4 line with selective expression in FDG.