Abstract
Therapeutic drug development is a long, expensive, and complex process that usually takes 12–15 years. In the early phases of drug discovery, in particular, there is a growing need for animal models that ensure the reduction in both cost and time. Caenorhabditis elegans has been traditionally used to address fundamental aspects of key biological processes, such as apoptosis, aging, and gene expression regulation. During the last decade, with the advent of large‐scale platforms for screenings, this invertebrate has also emerged as an essential tool in the pharmaceutical research industry to identify novel drugs and drug targets. In this review, we discuss the reasons why C. elegans has been positioned as an outstanding cost‐effective option for drug discovery, highlighting both the advantages and drawbacks of this model. Particular attention is paid to the suitability of this nematode in large‐scale genetic and pharmacological screenings. High‐throughput screenings in C. elegans have indeed contributed to the breakthrough of a wide variety of candidate compounds involved in extensive fields including neurodegeneration, pathogen infections and metabolic disorders. The versatility of this nematode, which enables its instrumentation as a model of human diseases, is another attribute also herein underscored. As illustrative examples, we discuss the utility of C. elegans models of both human neurodegenerative diseases and parasitic nematodes in the drug discovery industry. Summing up, this review aims to demonstrate the impact of C. elegans models on the drug discovery pipeline.
Keywords: C. elegans, drug discovery, genetic screenings, human disease models, pharmacological screenings
Abbreviations
- AChR
muscle nicotinic receptor
- AT
α1‐antitrypsin
- Aβ
β‐amyloid
- CACNA1A
calcium voltage‐gated channel subunit alpha 1A
- CGC
Caenorhabditis Genetics Center
- HTS
high‐throughput screening
- MOA
Mechanism of action
- NGM
Nematode Growth Medium
- PBS
phenotypic‐based drug screens
- TBS
target‐based drug screens
1. INTRODUCTION: THE NEMATODE Caenorhabditis elegans
Since its introduction into research by Sydney Brenner in the early 60s, the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans has played a pivotal role in different areas of biomedical investigation. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 Studies on C. elegans have contributed to fundamental breakthroughs in life science, such as the discovery of genetic regulators of programmed cell death, the use of the green fluorescent protein (GFP) as a protein marker, and the discovery of RNA interference (RNAi). 10 , 11 , 12
C. elegans is a tiny (~1 mm in length), soil, free‐living, and bacteria‐eating nematode 13 , 14 which can develop as either of two sexes, self‐fertilizing hermaphrodites or males. Males represent a minor population (~0.2% of population). 14 , 15 Healthy hermaphrodites produce up to 300 self‐progeny although they are capable of giving approximately 1000 offspring if they are mated with males.
This nematode typically lives for about 3 weeks at 20°C in the laboratory. Unlike other members of the Nematoda phylum, C. elegans is a nonhazardous and nonpathogenic animal that can be manipulated with standard safety rules. A unique benefit of using C. elegans in the laboratory is that it can be frozen and stored in liquid nitrogen or −80°C ultra‐freezers until needed. 14 Moreover, its use does not raise the ethical issues associated with the use of vertebrates (Figure 1).
FIGURE 1.

Caenorhabditis elegans as a versatile platform for drug discovery. Its genetic amenability and ease of transgenesis allows elucidation of MOAs by forward and reverse genetic screens and generation of "humanized worms" to emulate conditions seen in humans. All this combined with the feasibility for HTS and automation of easily scored phenotypes converts C. elegans into a powerful model for pharmacological research. For more detailed anatomy and other C. elegans resources visit: Wormatlas (www.wormatlas.org), Wormbase (www.wormbase.org), Wormbook (www.wormbook.org)
C. elegans ´ life cycle, which is very short, takes approximately 2.5–3 days and is divided into embryogenesis (~16 h), four larval stages (L1–L4, ~28 h) and the adult molt, from L4 to adult (~12 h). Adverse environmental conditions (starvation, high population density, high temperature) in the late L1 larval stage trigger entry into a developmental arrest phase called dauer. 16 , 17 Dauer larvae can survive stressful conditions for months until encountering favorable conditions that permit resuming reproductive development. The presence of separate sexes and the short life cycle permit rapid genetic crosses in the laboratory. It has an invariant number of somatic cells: 959 in hermaphrodites and 1031 in males. C. elegans cellular genealogies have been traced from embryo to newly hatched larva. Unlike mammals, the pattern of cell lineages is invariant among individuals, which has been key to understand the roles of developmental control genes. 18 , 19 , 20
Despite its apparent simplicity, C. elegans contains organs and tissues present in more complex organisms, such as muscles, hypodermis, intestine, reproductive and excretory system, and a well‐described nervous system (Figure 1). It is also the only organism where the complete neural wiring diagram has been established. 21 , 22 Its transparency allows the easy visualization of specific cells and subcellular structures through Nomarski (differential interference contrast, DIC) optics using whole‐live animals. The visualization of protein expression patterns, protein subcellular localization, and activity of specific cells using transgenic reporters and genetically encoded calcium indicators is feasible in living animals at any point in their lives (Figure 1). 23 , 24 , 25
The fact that C. elegans was the first multicellular organism to have its complete genome sequenced (C. elegans Sequencing Consortium 1998) as well as its amenable genetic manipulation helped to turn this worm into a powerful organism for genetic screens. 26 , 27 83% of C. elegans proteome is predicted to have human homolog genes 28 and it has been estimated that ~50% of C. elegans protein‐coding genes have a functional ortholog in humans. 29 Essential biological molecules and cell signaling pathways, such as the insulin‐signaling pathway, innate immunity regulatory pathways, synaptic machinery, and systems involved in protein homeostasis are highly conserved between worms and mammals. 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34
Taken together, all these features make C. elegans an excellent model organism that bridges the gap between the simplicity of cultured cells and the complexity of multicellular organisms.
2. C. elegans IN DRUG DISCOVERY
The advances in molecular biology techniques and genome knowledge allowed drug screening to be carried out directly on target proteins. Therefore, target‐based drug screens (TBS) have become the most commonly used approach for drug discovery. In this type of approach, compounds are screened for their capacity to bind or alter the activity of specific target proteins using cell extracts or cell cultures. However, as targets are previously identified and validated, TBS does not permit the discovery of novel targets and the elucidation of mechanisms of action (MOAs) is frequently limited to agonism or antagonism of known receptors/pathways. Moreover, once hits are detected they need to be tested in the context of a whole organism to further analyze its biological efficacy and toxicity. In contrast to TBS, phenotypic‐based drug screens (PBS) use cells or animal disease models to identify compounds that rescue or ameliorate the disease phenotype. This animal‐based approach includes the effects of cell communications and tissue interactions in the effect of a given compound. This unbiased strategy allows the identification of compounds with novel MOAs. One of the main caveats of PBS is that the identification of targets and MOAs could be complicated, particularly when mammalian animal models are used. This drawback can be significantly mitigated using invertebrates, such as the nematode C. elegans, which has lately gained consideration as an excellent platform for the identification of new drug targets and drug discovery.
Automation of worm transfer, image acquisition, and data analysis allows the use of C. elegans for high‐throughput screening (HTS) assays. 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 Several companies (Celescreen, Sunnybiotech, Nagi Biosciences) offer these types of assays to the pharmaceutical industry for the identification of new potential compounds and validation of pharmacological targets. In the last 10 years, HTS in C. elegans has become—in fact—a useful tool to identify candidate compounds as potential treatments for several pathological conditions (Table 1).
TABLE 1.
Caenorhabditis elegans phenotypic‐based drug screenings. The table shows relevant drug screenings assays performed during the last decade in C. elegans models for human and animal diseases
| Biological activity | Initial screening set | Identified hits | References |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Anti‐proteotoxicity Neuroprotection |
10 positive modulators of healthspan | Metformin, lithium, and curcumin | 40 |
| 18 compounds | α‐methyl‐α‐phenylsuccinimide | 41 | |
| 87 flavonoids and 13 neurosteroids | 12 flavonoids (e.g., isoquercitrin) and 2 steroids (3β‐Methoxy‐Pregnenolone and 17β‐estradiol) | 42 | |
| 3 850 compounds | 13 hits (e.g., pimozide) | 43 | |
| 983 FDA‐approved drugs | 4 hits (dronedarone, tofranil, bendrofluazide, buspar) | 44 | |
| 4 polyphenolic compounds | Ferulic acid | 45 | |
| 30 FDA‐approved drugs | Tannic acid, bacitracin | 46 | |
| 115 000 compounds | Four tetrahydroquinolinones | 47 | |
| Anti‐aging | 1386 FDA‐approved drugs | Verapamil | 48 |
| 32 compounds | 1 hit (chalcone like‐compound) | 49 | |
| ~100 serine hydrolase inhibitors | JZL184 | 50 | |
| 107 FDA‐approved drugs | Tiagabine | 51 | |
| 15 FDA‐approved drugs | Captopril | 52 | |
| 33 000 compounds | 57 hits (e.g., nitrophenyl piperazine‐containing compounds) | 53 | |
| 1280 compounds | 57 hits (e.g., minocycline) | 54 | |
| normal and disease‐associated endogenous metabolites | α‐ketoglutarate | 55 | |
| Anti‐microbial | 69 compounds | 5 hits (phenyl triazine compounds) | 56 |
| 82 000 compounds | 185 hits (e.g., synthetic retinoid CD437) | 57 | |
| 86 000 compounds | 195 hits (e.g., 5‐fluorouracil) | 58 | |
| 21 500 compounds | 318 hits (e.g., phenylsulfonyl pyrazinecarbonitrile) | 59 | |
| 640 FDA‐approved drugs | 42 hits (e.g., closantel) | 60 | |
| 1600 compounds | 18 hits (e.g., iron‐chelator ciclopirox olamine) | 61 | |
| 1300 extracts (from endophytic fungi) | 4 hits | 62 | |
| 2560 | 12 hits (e.g., natural saponins) | 63 | |
| Anthelmintic | 12 benzopyrano pyrazol compounds | 4 hits | 64 |
| 575 compounds | 29 hits (e.g., arylidene ketones) | 65 | |
| 11 imidazole‐derivatives | 2 hits (e.g., diisopropylphenyl‐imidazole) | 66 | |
| 400 compounds (Pathogen Box library) | 18 hits (e.g., isoxazole compounds) | 39 | |
| 480 compounds | 20 hits (e.g., dihydrobenzoxazepinones) | 67 | |
| 67 012 compounds | 30 hits (e.g., ethyl benzamide moiety compounds | 68 | |
| Anti‐tumoral | 4 in vitro anticancer compounds | 4 hits | 69 |
| 30 plant extracts | Harmine (from the plant Peganum harmala) | 70 | |
| ~9000 compounds | 2 hits (an EGFR inhibitor and a MEK inhibitor) | 71 | |
|
Anti‐metabolic disorders (obesity, insulin resistance, type II diabetes) |
24 plants and fungal extracts | 2 hits (extracts of Inonotus obliquus and Gardenia jasminoides) | 72 |
| 350 natural products | 1 hit (swertiamarin) | 73 | |
| 8 natural plant compounds | 2 hits (isoquinoline alkaloids) | 74 |
The fact that C. elegans shares the nematode phylum with several parasitic roundworms makes it a straightforward model to be used for the development of anthelmintic drugs. Its use has allowed the MOA elucidation of several nematocidal drugs 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 (Table 2). However, its use goes far beyond than merely applying C. elegans to the discovery of drugs with anthelmintic potential. C. elegans is also exploited as an accessible platform to recapitulate distinctive phenotypes of human diseases, such as cancer, diabetes, neurodegenerative disorders, and pathogen infection. 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 The molecular pathways underlying a biological process that, when altered, could lead to physiological diseases are usually conserved throughout the animal kingdom. The alteration of these conserved pathways in C. elegans often leads to specific phenotypes and behaviors, such as modifications in lifespan, stress resistance, or locomotion. All these phenotypes are easily measurable using automated protocols and devices, making the screening of drugs that ameliorate or rescue these defects a relatively simple procedure.
TABLE 2.
Recent contributions in deciphering drug‐targets and mechanism of action. Representative compounds for which the use of C. elegans has been useful in elucidating their mechanisms of action
| Compound | Field | Identified target/Mechanism of action | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resveratrol | Neurodegeneration | Reduces β‐amyloid by targeting UBL‐5 and XBP‐1, proteins implicated in UPRmt and UPRER | 90 |
| Minocycline | Aging | Increases lifespan by decreasing mARN translation | 91 |
| RPW‐24 | Microbial infection | Stimulates innate immune response through pmk‐1/p38 MAPK pathway, and the transcription factor, atf‐7 | 92 |
| Monepantel | Helminth infection | Targets ACR‐20 and ACR‐23 from the DEG‐3 subgroup of nAChR subunits | 93 |
| Metformin | Cancer | Induces tumor growth inhibition and lifespan extension by targeting nuclear pore complex (NPC) and acyl‐CoA dehydrogenase family member‐10 (ACAD10) | 94 |
| Hesperidin | Metabolic disorders | Inhibits lipid accumulation by downregulating lipid metabolism genes (fat‐6 and fat‐7) | 95 |
Abbreviations: ACR, acetylcholine receptor subunit; atf‐7, Cyclic AMP‐dependent transcription factor 7; MAPK, mitogen‐activated protein kinase; pmk‐1, p38 MAPK; UBL‐5, Ubiquitin‐like protein 5; UPRER, unfolded protein response of the endoplasmic reticulum; UPRmt, mitochondrial unfolded protein response; XBP‐1, X‐Box Binding Protein 1.
Several genetic tools for the manipulation of single genes or groups of genes are readily available in C. elegans (chemical mutagenesis, transgenesis, RNAi, and CRISPR/Cas9) (Figure 1). Animals carrying mutations of highly conserved biochemical pathways or expressing exogenous pathognomonic protein of a specific disease can be engineered in few weeks. Mutant strains and animals expressing human transgenes are available at a very low cost at the Caenorhabditis Genetics Center (CGC). Moreover, the rapid life‐cycle and the high brood size of C. elegans permit the analysis of the effects of compounds not only in the exposed animal but also in the progeny in a very short time‐frame.
Cell cultures or cell extracts are typically the initial step in drug development. Using invertebrate animal models in these early steps is ideal to reduce research costs and time as they help to identify compounds that, apart from being effective in interacting with the active target, maintain their efficacy even after absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) processes. They also provide information about potential systemic toxicity and biocompatibility. 96
Although ADME processes are important sources of information compared with cell cultures, in C. elegans they have certain limitations that should be taken into account at the moment of processing results from drug‐screening assays. In particular, the thick cuticle, which forms a strong barrier that limits drug absorption, can usually render false‐negative results. 97
C. elegans´ low‐cost maintenance, small size, genetic amenability, and conservation of key molecular pathways with mammalian animals convert this worm into an excellent alternative to significantly reduce drug development costs. Although the use of C. elegans as a platform for drug screening is recent, there are compounds that have been identified in this nematode and which, once validated on vertebrate models, are currently being evaluated in human patients. For example, hits obtained in a drug screening performed in a C. elegans model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis were validated in zebrafish and mice. One of these hits, the neuroleptic Pimozide, a Ca2+ channel blocker that stabilizes neuromuscular transmission in C. elegans, has also shown efficiency in a short randomized controlled trial of sporadic ALS subjects. 43 Another report evaluated the pearl powder (a Chinese medicine) by combining C. elegans studies with a clinical trial. The authors have correlated the lifespan extension found in C. elegans with the higher antioxidant capacity in blood samples of patients treated with pearl powder. 98 These two examples serve as proofs of concept for the translational potential of drug screenings in the invertebrate C. elegans. Since the number of drug screenings in this nematode is increasing year after year (Table 1), more clinical trials for hits identified in C. elegans are expected in the near future.
2.1. Genetic screening assays
One of the greatest advantages of using C. elegans for biomedical research is undoubtedly its amenability for genetic manipulation. Genetic screens are widely used in C. elegans to either discover gene function or find genes involved in relevant biological pathways. Furthermore, the feasibility of rapid genetic crossing permits epistatic analyses to find new players in known genetic pathways. 99
To date, two strategies to perform screenings in C. elegans have been developed: forward genetics and reverse genetics. Whereas the former uses mutagens to randomly generate mutations that induce or reverse a given phenotype, the latter analyzes the phenotype obtained after altering or knocking down a specific known gene. Forward genetics therefore goes from phenotype to gene, whereas reverse genetics works the other way around, that is, from gene to phenotype.
2.1.1. Forward genetics
Mutations are important tools for gene function discovery. Mutagenesis can be accomplished using a variety of chemical agents, such as ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS), N‐ethyl‐N‐nitrosourea (ENU), trimethylpsoralen (TMP), among others. Hermaphrodites (P0) are randomly mutagenized at the late L4/early adult stages and then distributed in Petri dishes. F1 hermaphrodite progeny that are heterozygous for these mutations can be allowed to self‐fertilize. The F2 animals, which bring mutations to homozygosis, are isolated based on the phenotype of interest. 27 Several mutations generate clearly altered phenotypes, such as changes in development, lifespan, stress resistance, uncoordinated movement (unc), or dumpy‐shaped animals (dpy). Today, mutated genes underlying a given phenotype can be identified by whole‐genome sequencing. 100 , 101
Another approach, which has proven to be very useful for identifying novel gene interactions, consists in performing mutagenesis directly in strains already carrying mutations that induce a strong phenotype. 102 , 103 , 104 Mutant animals are then mutagenized allowing enhancer or suppressor genes to be detected. For example, a suppressor screening recently performed on a hyperactive mutant in UNC‐2, the worm ortholog for calcium voltage‐gated channel subunit alpha 1A (CACNA1A) channel, has led to the identification of key modulators of channel function. 104
Chemical genetic screening is another strategy which involves the use of drugs that induce a strong phenotype. After mutagenesis, which may affect the drug target gene or other genes involved in the same pathway, either resistant or hypersensitive mutants can be identified. 75 , 105 , 106 , 107
In C. elegans, forward genetic screens have been traditionally used to identify molecular targets and MOAs for anthelmintic agents. 75 , 76 , 77 , 108 However, more recently, this approach has also proved to be useful for discovering targets and MOAs for drugs with potential relevance in metabolic, neurological, and oncological disorders. 68 , 94 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112
2.1.2. Reverse genetics
In 1998, Fire and Mello found that injection of double‐stranded RNA (dsRNA) into worm gonads allows gene knocking down in the progeny. 12 Since then, RNAi knockdown has become a powerful tool in other animals and cultured cells. 113 , 114 , 115 However, in C. elegans it can be easily achieved by feeding worms with bacteria expressing dsRNA or just soaking worms in dsRNA solution. Therefore, this technique has served for functional analyses of a plethora of genes in worms.
Genomic RNAi bacterial feeding libraries that cover most of the C. elegans genome have been generated, 116 , 117 avoiding the requirement of in vitro synthesis of dsRNA. C. elegans, one of the few organisms for which genome‐wide RNAi screens are feasible, has been found to be a useful tool to identify genes involved in essential biological processes 2 , 118 , 119 , 120 and pathological conditions. 107 , 121 , 122
A historical limitation of RNAi knock‐down in C. elegans has been the poor penetrance of RNAi in neurons. However, several strategies have been developed to solve this caveat, namely strains expressing the transmembrane proteins required for RNAi transportation SID‐1 pan‐neuronally, 123 strains deficient in genes coding for ribonuclease enzymes, 124 neurons transformed to an immature and more permeable stage 125 or even a combination of them. 126
In the last decade, several customized endonucleases, such as zinc‐finger nucleases (ZFNs) and transcription activator‐like effector nucleases (TALENs), 127 , 128 have been used in genome editing. Other techniques, such as CRISPR/Cas9 and Mos‐1 single copy insertion that allow the introduction of almost any change in any gene, have also been developed, further widening the tool repertoire to perform reverse genetics in the nematode. 129 , 130 , 131
2.2. Drug screening assays
Drug ingestion is probably the main way through which xenobiotic molecules can gain access to target tissues in wild‐type C. elegans. 132 , 133 However, the amphids, a pair of anterior sensory structures opened to the outside environment, and the vulva are also involved in drug and nanoparticles intake, respectively. 134 , 135 Moreover, the use of animals that have a compromised cuticle can significantly increase drug absorption. 97 C. elegans is typically grown in the laboratory on petri‐dishes containing NGM agar and E. coli as a food source. In the past, during the first drug screens, compounds were generally dissolved in the agar. 14 , 136 Although this method has contributed to the elucidation of MOAs for several compounds previously proven to be biologically active, 137 , 138 the agar‐based technique does not permit large scale screenings because it is labor‐ and time‐consuming and needs large quantities of drugs. 14 Even with limitations, these assays are still very valuable for assessing small compound libraries. 66
The introduction of C. elegans liquid cultures in multi‐well format together with workflow automation from worm transfer to data analysis enabled the development of HTS assays. 139 , 140 Moreover, the breakthrough of microfluidic devices for C. elegans have improved the strength of HTS mainly thanks to the small amounts of compound (microscale) that are required and to the possibility of observing worms in parallel or in a serial manner. 141
2.3. Challenges of using C. elegans model in drug discovery
In spite of the obvious advantages of using C. elegans for drug screening, some caveats need to be considered. First, C. elegans cultures require bacterial co‐culture as a food source. Many drugs and compounds are metabolized by bacteria and could alter drug efficacy. These limitations can be circumvented using killed bacteria as a food source. 142 , 143 However, feeding worms with dead bacteria can also affect some phenotypes (e.g., it slows worm development). 144 Therefore, the chosen food source will depend on the phenotype to be assessed, the compounds to be tested, and the bacteria species to be used for worm feeding. 142 , 145
A second disadvantage is related to the thick C. elegans cuticle that usually affects drug uptake. Some studies revealed that internal tested‐drug concentration could be less than half of that applied externally. 146 This implies that some drugs are discarded as hits due to their inefficacy to pass through the cuticle barrier and that some compounds need very high drug concentrations to produce a biological effect. To reduce these limitations, mutant strains with compromised cuticles have been used to enhance drug uptake. 97 The selection of these mutants depends on the trade‐off between enhanced cuticle permeability and animal fitness. 97 Although C. elegans cuticle impermeability is indeed a limitation, it increases the potential significance of a positive hit in specific drug screening assays. In line with this, hits in anthelmintic search assays that induce death in C. elegans are extremely likely to kill parasitic nematodes (which in general have thinner cuticles) at lower concentrations. 68
Finally, C. elegans lacks a circulatory system and many vital organs present in mammals. It has an innate immune system but lacks an adaptive immune system or a myelination system. This is the reason why it is difficult to model diseases affecting these organs/systems in C. elegans. In some cases, it is nonetheless possible to study a disease affecting a particular mammal organ nonexistent in the worm using phenologues. The latter are described as a group of overlapping genes defining a pathway that, when disrupted, cause different phenotypes in different species. For example, osteogenesis imperfecta (known as brittle bone disease) is caused by mutations in the human collagen COL1A1 and COL1A2 genes. 147 Although C. elegans lacks bones, it expresses collagen genes. When worm collagen genes are mutated, they lead to cuticle defects, easily showing recognized dumpy phenotypes. 148 Thus, the dumpy phenotype can be used to perform screenings to study collagen‐associated diseases even in the absence of the affected tissue.
Additionally, even if a disease gene ortholog is not present in the worm, a disease model can be artificially generated by expressing human transgenes. 149 , 150 Transgenic animals are then used as tools to screen drugs or new genes involved in the disease phenotype with the goal of finding new therapeutic options. For example, mutations in α1‐antitrypsin (AT) lead to lung and liver diseases. 151 , 152 Although C. elegans has no orthologs for AT, transgenic expression of human AT gene in worms can replicate in the animal intestine the abnormal misfolded protein accumulation observed in patients´ livers. A drug screen performed using this model allowed to detect drugs capable of decreasing misfolded protein accumulation. 35
3. RELEVANT C. elegans APPLICATIONS FOR DRUG TARGET DISCOVERIES
As illustrative examples of the use of C. elegans model in pharmacology research, we will discuss findings that show the advantages of using this nematode in the drug discovery field.
3.1. Neurodegenerative diseases
As a result of the continuous increase in the proportion of the elderly population, age‐related disorders have become a major health concern. Neurodegenerative diseases (NDs), in particular, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD), and Huntington's disease (HD), are considered as top ten lethal illnesses (G7 Academies´Joint Statements 2017). Despite their growing incidence worldwide and decades of intense research, there is still neither a cure nor a set of effect‐mitigation strategies for these diseases. Research efforts are currently aimed at precluding or—at least—delaying their progression. The discovery of curative treatments for the majority of these NDs remains elusive due to several factors. NDs are heterogeneous in etiology (while some of them have a genetic or hereditary origin, others have no related cause). They are also heterogeneous in the collection of neurons affected, leading to an assortment of clinical manifestations ranging from cognitive to progressive motor dysfunction. 153 They nonetheless share some pathological hallmarks. For example, aging is a strong risk factor related to their development. 154 Moreover, the abnormal formation and deposition of misfolded protein aggregates in specific neurons is a trademark of most NDs. Because of this attribute, these disorders are generally referred to as “proteinopathies.” Therefore, current research is focused on the above‐mentioned common features by targeting pathological aggregation or by delaying physiological aging. 155
In this respect, C. elegans is a powerful in vivo model for the development of targeted therapeutics. Most of the advantages that convert this animal into a superb candidate for drug discovery have already been mentioned in this review and are also applicable to the neurodegeneration research field. Still, there are some topics that deserve special attention. Features that confer C. elegans an extra value as a model for age‐related proteinopathies research include, among others: (i) the remarkable similarities at the molecular and cellular levels between nematode and vertebrate neurons, (ii) the continuous design of mutant and transgenic C. elegans models of human NDs, 82 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 , 160 , 161 (iii) the thoroughly studied whole‐animal neuronal connectome which can be individually visualized using fluorescent reporters in the living transparent worm, 11 , 21 , 22 , 162 (iv) its short and genetically tractable lifespan, 7 , 163 , 164 , 165 , 166 and (v) the recently developed high‐throughput (even automatized) drug screening platforms. 35 , 54 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 , 171 , 172 , 173 However, the limitations on using a “humanized” worm model for neurodegenerative proteinopathies should be taken into account, particularly its simple nervous system, glia and lack of myelin. Furthermore, genes encoding for voltage‐gated sodium channels are absent in the C. elegans genome. 174 Unlike vertebrates, the action potentials detected in muscles and neurons of C. elegans depend on voltage‐gated calcium channels. 175 , 176 , 177 Despite these caveats, C. elegans is an excellent whole‐animal platform to identify genes, drug targets, and compounds with neuroprotective roles in human NDs.
3.1.1. C. elegans models for ND
The first C. elegans model of a human ND was built 25 years ago, 178 and, since then, an extensive list of animal models for most of the NDs have been generated (Table 3). The methods that are regularly used include knocking‐down or ‐out the homologous gene involved in the human disease if it is present in the worm genome or, if there is no orthologous, the method of choice involves the transgenic expression of the human gene to mimic a disease‐related phenotype. Most of the C. elegans models of human NDs are transgenic strains developed by overexpression of human wild‐type or disease‐associated mutant genes. However, overexpressing genes, even as wild‐type, sometimes results in an artificial condition that can be pathogenic. CRISP/Cas9 technology has been fortunately established in C. elegans 179 and recent single‐copy knock‐in models of some NDs have been developed (Table 3). 180 , 181 , 182
TABLE 3.
List of the main C. elegans models of ND, employed for the understanding of disease molecular mechanisms and for performing genetic and pharmacologic screenings
| Model of | Strategy | Expression | Transgene | Phenotype |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HD | polyQ expression | Constitutive muscle | Punc‐54::polyQ‐yfp | Age‐dependent aggregation and motility defects 82 |
| Constitutive pan‐neuronal | Prgef‐1::polyQ‐yfp | Age‐dependent aggregation and neuronal dysfunction like trashing and pharyngeal pumping 83 | ||
| polyQ‐HTT expression | Constitutive muscle | Punc‐54::htt513Q128::yfp | Age‐dependent aggregation and motility defects 183 | |
| Chemosensory neurons | Posm‐10::gfp+Posm‐10::httQ150+dpy−20(+) | Accelerated ASH neuronal degeneration 184 | ||
| Mechanosensory neurons | Pmec‐3::htt57Q128::cfp+Pmec3::yfp | Aggregated polyQ, morphological abnormalities and dysfunction of mechanosensory neurons 185 | ||
| AD | human Aβ expression | Constitutive muscle | Punc‐54::Aβ1 ‐ 42 | Age‐dependent aggregation and paralysis 178 |
| Temperature‐induced muscle | smg‐1(cc546);Is[Pmyo‐3::Aβ1 ‐ 42::letUTR+rol6(su1006)] | Rapid paralysis by temperature upshift 186 | ||
| Constitutive pan‐neuronal | Pmyo‐2::yfp+Punc‐119::Aβ1 ‐ 42 | Impaired locomotion and chemotaxis behavior 187 | ||
| Temperature‐induced pan‐neuronal | smg‐1(cc546);Is[snb‐1::Aβ1‐42+mtl‐2::gfp] | Defective chemotaxis, formation of amyloid deposits, and serotonin hypersensitivity 188 | ||
| human Tau expression | Constitutive pan‐neuronal | Paex‐3::h4R1NTau WT, V337M and P301L | Insoluble tau accumulation, neurodegeneration and uncoordinated movement (Unc) 189 | |
| Single copy knock‐in in mechanosensory neurons | Single copy human Tau mutants (T231E and K274/281Q) | Diminished touch response and neuronal morphological abnormalities 190 | ||
| PD | α‐synuclein expression | Constitutive muscle | Punc‐54::α‐syn::yfp+unc‐119(+) | Motility deficits and α‐syn aggregation 5 , 159 |
| Constitutive pan‐neuronal | Paex‐3::α‐syn (WT, A53T)+Paex‐3::gfp/Pdat‐1::gfp | Motility deficits, significant dopaminergic neuron loss 158 , 191 | ||
| Constitutive dopaminergic neurons | Pdat‐1::α‐syn (WT, A53T)+Pdat‐1::gfp | Dopaminergic neuronal loss and dendritic breaks, α‐syn accumulation 158 , 192 | ||
| Neurotoxin‐induced | Dopaminergic neurons | [Pdat‐1::gfp] subject to 6‐OHDA or MPTP | Morphological dopaminergic neuronal defects 193 | |
| ALS | SOD‐1 models | Temperature‐induced muscle | Phsp‐16.2::sod‐1 (WT, A4V, G37R, G93A) + Pmyo‐3::sod‐1 (WT, A4V)::GFP +rol‐6(su1006) | Increased sensitivity to oxidative stress, and oxidative stress induced‐ SOD‐1 aggregation 194 |
| Constitutive muscle | Punc‐54::sod=1(WT, G85R, G93A, G127insTGGGstop)::yfp | Aggregation of mutant SOD‐1 and motility defects 195 | ||
| Constitutive pan‐neuronal | Psnb‐1::sod‐1(WT, G85R)::yfp) | Aggregation of mutant SOD‐1 and motility defects 196 | ||
| Single copy knock‐in | Single copy knock‐in expression of mutants forms of sod‐1 (A4V, H71Y, L84V, G85R, G93A) | Aggregation of mutant SOD‐1 and oxidative stress induced neurodegeneration 180 | ||
| TPD‐43 models | Constitutive pan‐neuronal | Psnb‐1::tdp‐43 (WT, G290A, A315T, M337V)+snb‐1::gfp | Uncoordinated movement and GABAergic motor neuron degeneration 197 , 198 | |
| Constitutive GABAergic motor neurons | Punc‐47::tpd‐43 (WT, A315T) | Age‐dependent motility defects and neuronal degeneration 199 | ||
| FUS models | Constitutive pan‐neuronal | Prgef‐1::fus (WT, R514G, R521G, R522G, R524S, P525L) | Aggregation and paralysis 200 | |
| Single copy knock‐in | Single‐copy knock‐in of R524S and P525L equivalent mutations into fust‐1 (FUS orthologous gene) | Impaired neuronal and muscular autophagy 181 |
Abbreviations: ALS, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; a‐syn, a‐synuclein; FUS, RNA‐binding protein Fused in Sarcoma; HTT, huntingtin; MPTP, 1‐methyl‐4‐phenyl‐1,2,3,6‐tetrahydropyridine;6‐OHDA, 6‐hydroxydopamine; polyQ, polyglutamine; SOD‐1, superoxide dismutase 1; TPD‐43, Transactive response DNA‐binding protein‐43.
Since C. elegans has no orthologous gene for β‐amyloid (Aβ), α‐synuclein, or huntingtin, models of NDs have been essentially produced by transgenic overexpression of the disease causing‐protein in either body‐wall muscle cells, in all neurons or in a specific subset of neurons. 82 , 83 , 150 , 158 , 178 , 195 , 197 , 201 In most cases, the protein is tagged with GFP, which permits monitoring protein aggregation in whole live animals. Furthermore, according to the promoter used, that is, either muscle or neuronal promoters, toxic protein aggregation is reflected by specific pronounced phenotypes which are indispensable for high‐throughput screenings. For instance, muscle‐expressing strains usually manifest proteotoxicity as age‐dependent locomotion defects. In addition, muscle cells are large, allowing the visualization of protein aggregation more easily than in neurons. Moreover, RNAi is more efficient in muscles than in neurons, making these models more amenable for RNAi screens. On the other hand, transgenic strains with neuronal expression of protein aggregates are more accurate models of NDs. In the latter, proteotoxicity can be assessed by means of indirect phenotypes, such as neurodegeneration or specific morphological and/or behavioral neuronal defects. Thus, according to the selected strain, different read‐outs have been described, which can be used in HTS with the aim to evaluate genes and drug modifiers as potential therapeutic interventions.
Genetic and pharmacological screenings have been performed in these models by tracking protein aggregation and assessing a simple phenotype (such as locomotion or neuronal behavior defects) in whole‐live animals. In fact, large RNAi‐mediated reverse screens, performed in C. elegans models of NDs, have identified gene modifiers of protein homeostasis, including genes with roles in protein synthesis, folding, degradation, and vesicle trafficking. 3 , 5 , 159 , 202 , 203 , 204 , 205 Forward mutagenesis genetic screens have also been developed in these models. For example, a study using a C. elegans model of HD identified a novel gene, called modifier of aggregation 4 (moag‐4) as an enhancer of protein aggregation. 206 Pharmacological screenings have also contributed with hundreds of neuroprotective compounds, classified in a wide range of categories, including natural and synthetic products, herbal medicines, and also FDA‐approved drugs (Table 1). These findings highlight the strength of C. elegans in finding novel genetic and drug modifiers for human NDs, reinforcing its potential in preclinical drug discovery.
Despite the complexity of the pathology underlying NDs, most of the pathways involved are conserved or they can be mimicked in the worm. The aim of using C. elegans as a platform of NDs is to dig inside molecular mechanisms to unravel pathological features and to develop effective strategies to treat these diseases.
3.2. C. elegans as model of parasite nematodes
Parasitic nematodes infect a wide range of species, including humans, companion animals, livestock, and crops producing a devastating impact on human life quality and economy. The World Health Organization (WHO) claims that helminth infections are the most common neglected tropical diseases and estimates that 30% of the human world population is infected with at least one parasite (https://www.who.int/neglected_diseases/en/). This prevalence could be even higher in rural areas and in low‐income countries. Although helminth infections are, in general, not lethal, human helminthiases are associated with morbidity. The consequences are particularly serious in children, impairing growth, nutrition, cognition, and school performance.
Several issues are of concern in relation to helminthiasis management and treatment, namely (i) the loss of effectiveness caused by parasite resistance, (ii) the environmental impact of drugs used for crop protection, and (iii) the lack of interest in this field by the pharmaceutical industry.
The development of novel pharmacological agents for helminthiasis treatment has been delayed for decades and the repertoire of available anthelmintics is limited. 77 , 207 , 208 Since drug‐resistant parasitic nematodes have been reported for all classes of currently used anthelmintics, 209 , 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 there is an urgent need to advance in pharmacological research to develop new antiparasitic drugs.
Due to their complex life cycles, growing and maintaining parasitic nematodes under standard laboratory conditions are both challenging. The limited molecular genetic tools available for these nematodes hampers the study of molecular mechanisms. 214 It has been shown that compounds that induce C. elegans death likely also kill parasitic nematodes, 68 highlighting the potential of this worm as an anthelmintic screening platform (Table 1). 39 , 215 , 216
3.2.1. Current use of C. elegans in anthelmintic drug discovery
In the past, C. elegans was used to dissect the target pathways and molecular mechanisms of known anthelmintics, such as levamisole, ivermectin, benzimidazoles, nitazoxanide, and amino‐acetonitrile derivatives. 75 , 77 , 78 , 108 , 217 , 218 , 219 Nowadays, it is a recognized platform to screen new compounds and drug repurposing 220 that must be subsequently tested in parasites. Many of the currently used anthelmintics are imidazole derivatives. 221 In general, the mechanisms underlying the anthelmintic effect can induce worm death or generate paralysis to facilitate parasite expulsion. The anthelmintic mechanisms of imidazole‐derivatives are diverse. For example, levamisole causes nematode spastic paralysis through the potent activation of a muscle nicotinic receptor (AChR) 218 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 whereas the anthelmintic action of benzimidazoles (e.g., albendazole and mebendazole) arises from their capacity to block tubulin polymerization in nematode cells. 78 Thus, while the presence of the imidazole ring appears to be important for bioactivity, it does not restrict the molecular targets where imidazole‐containing anthelmintics can act. Recently, taking advantage of C. elegans as an established model for parasitic nematodes, we screened the nematicidal potential of novel imidazolium and imidazole derivatives. 66 We identified a new compound, diisopropylphenyl‐imidazole (DII), that is lethal to C. elegans through a novel mode of action that includes differential targeting in larvae and adult nematodes. This lethal effect appears to be specific for nematodes because at DII concentrations, proven to be toxic to C. elegans, no significant lethality on bacteria, Drosophila melanogaster and HEK‐293 cells has been detected. Using C. elegans mutant and transgenic strains, we found that DII effects on adult nematodes rely on a previously unidentified UNC‐29‐containing muscle AChR, different from the classical Levamisole‐sensitive AChR. Interestingly, DII targets appear to be different between larvae and adults as unc‐29 null mutant larvae are sensitive to the drug. 66 Summing up, using the model C. elegans we demonstrated that DII fulfills the major criteria necessary for the development of a novel anthelmintic, namely phylogenetic specificity and a novel biochemical mode of action. The next step will be to expose parasite worms to this already characterized drug.
Other researchers performed a screen of a small‐molecule library using C. elegans to test the anthelmintic activity of FDA‐approved drugs with the aim of repurposing their clinical activity. 226 The availability of data on their toxicity and pharmacokinetic characteristics will expedite its potential use for new therapeutic indications. From this screen, they found that the neuromodulatory drugs sertraline, paroxetine, and chlorpromazine kill C. elegans at multiple life stages and inhibit worm feeding. C. elegans mutants with resistance to known anthelmintic drugs are as sensitive as wild‐type worms to these three drugs, suggesting that they may act through novel targets. They also demonstrated that these drugs affect divergent parasitic helminth species, such as Trichuris muris and Ancylostoma caninum and the trematode Schistosoma mansoni. These researchers therefore conclude that these drugs may represent a new class of anthelmintic drugs that could be used in combination with classic anthelmintics to boost effectiveness as well as to avoid parasite drug resistance.
As a result of the limited repertoire of available anthelmintics and the alarming emergence of anthelmintic resistance, there is an urgent need to develop novel anthelmintics. C. elegans becomes a useful platform to accelerate the screening process for anthelmintic drug discovery. The use of C. elegans can permit the development of new parasite control strategies by identifying new drugs with better and broad‐spectrum, repurpose already approved drugs, and combine different therapeutic options.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Traditional preclinical drug discovery is a complex process that takes more than 10 years. Today, innovative strategies are required to satisfy both the increasing demand for better and more efficient therapies and the need to save resources and time for drug development. Under this scenario, the use of invertebrate animals, such as the nematode C. elegans, during the early phases of drug development becomes a very convenient strategy to achieve these two aims. Since the introduction of C. elegans into research studies, this nematode has been extensively used to understand fundamental biological processes. During the last years, C. elegans has also become an invaluable tool for the screening of compounds with potential therapeutic uses. This nematode is probably the best cost‐effective choice for early target validation scheme among animal models. Primary hits could be identified in C elegans as an initial filter. The efficacy and safety information gathered by the use of this nematode, significantly reduce costs, time, and the number of vertebrate animals required.
In this review, we have outlined several attributes that highlight the strength of C. elegans as a model for drug screening, drug repurposing, drug target identification, drug combination, and molecular drug mechanism unraveling. The advances in massive and automated high‐throughput drug discovery assays for C. elegans, the amenability of genetic manipulation, and the extended information available on gene structures, mutant and RNAi phenotypes, microarray data and protein–protein interactions (Wormbase) should be further exploited to facilitate the development of new drugs. The variety of C. elegans disease models now available in the drug discovery pipeline does secure a significant boost to our understanding of human diseases and accelerates the reach of effective disease treatments.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
All authors were involved in manuscript preparation for this project.
Funding information
This work was supported by Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (PIP 2015–2017 CO 11220150100182CO to DR), Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica (PICT 2017 0566 to MJDR), Universidad Nacional del Sur (PGI 2016 24/B261 to MJDR and PGI 2018 24/B291 to DR).
Contributor Information
Diego Rayes, Email: drayes@criba.edu.ar.
María José De Rosa, Email: mjderosa@criba.edu.ar.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
REFERENCES
- 1. Dillin A, Hsu AL, Arantes‐Oliveira N, et al. Rates of behavior and aging specified by mitochondrial function during development. Science. 2002;298(5602):2398‐2401. 10.1126/science.1077780 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Lee SS, Kennedy S, Tolonen AC, Ruvkun G. DAF‐16 target genes that control C. elegans life‐span and metabolism. Science. 2003;300(5619):644‐647. 10.1126/science.1083614 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Nollen EA, Garcia SM, van Haaften G, et al. Genome‐wide RNA interference screen identifies previously undescribed regulators of polyglutamine aggregation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101(17):6403‐6408. 10.1073/pnas.0307697101 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Kim Y, Sun H. Functional genomic approach to identify novel genes involved in the regulation of oxidative stress resistance and animal lifespan. Aging Cell. 2007;6(4):489‐503. 10.1111/j.1474-9726.2007.00302.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. van Ham TJ, Thijssen KL, Breitling R, Hofstra RM, Plasterk RH, Nollen EA. C. elegans model identifies genetic modifiers of alpha‐synuclein inclusion formation during aging. PLoS Genet. 2008;4(3):e1000027. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000027 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Habchi J, Arosio P, Perni M, et al. An anticancer drug suppresses the primary nucleation reaction that initiates the production of the toxic Abeta42 aggregates linked with Alzheimer's disease. Sci Adv. 2016;2(2):e1501244. 10.1126/sciadv.1501244 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. De Rosa MJ, Veuthey T, Florman J, et al. The flight response impairs cytoprotective mechanisms by activating the insulin pathway. Nature. 2019;573(7772):135‐138. 10.1038/s41586-019-1524-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Pirri JK, Rayes D, Alkema MJ. A change in the ion selectivity of ligand‐gated ion channels provides a mechanism to switch behavior. PLOS Biol. 2015;13(9):15. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002238 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Jones AK, Rayes D, Al‐Diwani A, et al. A Cys‐loop mutation in the Caenorhabditis elegans nicotinic receptor subunit UNC‐63 impairs but does not abolish channel function. J Biol Chem. 2011;286(4):2550‐2558. 10.1074/jbc.M110.177238 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Hengartner MO, Horvitz HR. Programmed cell death in Caenorhabditis elegans . Curr Opin Genet Dev. 1994;4(4):581‐586. 10.1016/0959-437X(94)90076-F [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Chalfie M, Tu Y, Euskirchen G, Ward WW, Prasher DC. Green fluorescent protein as a marker for gene expression. Science. 1994;263(5148):802‐805. 10.1126/science.8303295 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Fire A, Xu S, Montgomery MK, Kostas SA, Driver SE, Mello CC. Potent and specific genetic interference by double‐stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans . Nature. 1998;391(6669):806‐811. 10.1038/35888 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Samuel BS, Rowedder H, Braendle C, Félix M‐A, Ruvkun G. Caenorhabditis elegans; responses to bacteria from its natural habitats. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113(27):E3941. 10.1073/pnas.1607183113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Brenner S. The genetics of Caenorhabditis elegans . Genetics. 1974;77(1):71‐94. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Girard LR, Fiedler TJ, Harris TW, et al. WormBook: The online review of Caenorhabditis elegans biology. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35(Database):D472‐D475. 10.1093/nar/gkl894 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Cassada RC, Russell RL. The dauerlarva, a post‐embryonic developmental variant of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans . Dev Biol. 1975;46(2):326‐342. 10.1016/0012-1606(75)90109-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Golden JW, Riddle DL. A pheromone influences larval development in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans . Science. 1982;218(4572):578‐580. 10.1126/science.6896933 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Sulston JE, Horvitz HR. Post‐embryonic cell lineages of the nematode, Caenorhabditis elegans . Dev Biol. 1977;56(1):110‐156. 10.1016/0012-1606(77)90158-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Kimble J, Hirsh D. The postembryonic cell lineages of the hermaphrodite and male gonads in Caenorhabditis elegans . Dev Biol. 1979;70(2):396‐417. 10.1016/0012-1606(79)90035-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Sulston JE, Schierenberg E, White JG, Thomson JN. The embryonic cell lineage of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans . Dev Biol. 1983;100(1):64‐119. 10.1016/0012-1606(83)90201-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. White JG, Southgate E, Thomson JN, Brenner S. The structure of the nervous system of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans . Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1986;314(1165):1‐340. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Cook SJ, Jarrell TA, Brittin CA, et al. Whole‐animal connectomes of both Caenorhabditis elegans sexes. Nature. 2019;571(7763):63‐71. 10.1038/s41586-019-1352-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Kerr R, Lev‐Ram V, Baird G, Vincent P, Tsien RY, Schafer WR. Optical imaging of calcium transients in neurons and pharyngeal muscle of C. elegans . Neuron. 2000;26(3):583‐594. 10.1016/S0896-6273(00)81196-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Nagel G, Brauner M, Liewald JF, Adeishvili N, Bamberg E, Gottschalk A. Light activation of channelrhodopsin‐2 in excitable cells of Caenorhabditis elegans triggers rapid behavioral responses. Current Biol. 2005;15(24):2279‐2284. 10.1016/j.cub.2005.11.032 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Nguyen JP, Shipley FB, Linder AN, et al. Whole‐brain calcium imaging with cellular resolution in freely behaving Caenorhabditis elegans . Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2016;113(8):E1074‐E1081. 10.1073/pnas.1507110112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Singh J. Harnessing the power of genetics: Fast forward genetics in Caenorhabditis elegans [published online ahead of print, 2020 Sep 4]. Mol Genet Genomics. 2020. 10.1007/s00438-020-01721-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Jorgensen EM, Mango SE. The art and design of genetic screens: Caenorhabditis elegans . Nat Rev Genet. 2002;3(5):356‐369. 10.1038/nrg794 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Lai CH, Chou CY, Ch'ang LY, Liu CS, Lin W. Identification of novel human genes evolutionarily conserved in Caenorhabditis elegans by comparative proteomics. Genome Res. 2000;10(5):703‐713. 10.1101/gr.10.5.703 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Kim W, Underwood RS, Greenwald I, Shaye DD. OrthoList 2: A new comparative genomic analysis of human and Caenorhabditis elegans genes. Genetics. 2018;210(2):445‐461. 10.1534/genetics.118.301307 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Bargmann CI. Neurobiology of the Caenorhabditis elegans genome. Science. 1998;282(5396):2028‐2033. 10.1126/science.282.5396.2028 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Das D, Arur S. Conserved insulin signaling in the regulation of oocyte growth, development, and maturation. Mol Reprod Dev. 2017;84(6):444‐459. 10.1002/mrd.22806 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Jia K, Levine B. Autophagy is required for dietary restriction‐mediated life span extension in C. elegans . Autophagy. 2007;3(6):597‐599. 10.4161/auto.4989 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Kim DH, Feinbaum R, Alloing G, et al. A conserved p38 MAP kinase pathway in Caenorhabditis elegans innate immunity. Science. 2002;297(5581):623‐626. 10.1126/science.1073759 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Jia K, Chen D, Riddle DL. The TOR pathway interacts with the insulin signaling pathway to regulate C. elegans larval development, metabolism and life span. Development. 2004;131(16):3897‐3906. 10.1242/dev.01255 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Gosai SJ, Kwak JH, Luke CJ, et al. Automated high‐content live animal drug screening using C. elegans expressing the aggregation prone serpin α1‐antitrypsin Z. PLoS One. 2010;5(11):e15460. 10.1371/journal.pone.0015460 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Mathew MD, Mathew ND, Ebert PR. WormScan: A technique for high‐throughput phenotypic analysis of Caenorhabditis elegans . PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e33483. 10.1371/journal.pone.0033483 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Swierczek NA, Giles AC, Rankin CH, Kerr RA. High‐throughput behavioral analysis in C. elegans . Nat Methods. 2011;8(7):592‐598. 10.1038/nmeth.1625 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Xian B, Shen J, Chen W, et al. WormFarm: A quantitative control and measurement device toward automated Caenorhabditis elegans aging analysis. Aging Cell. 2013;12(3):398‐409. 10.1111/acel.12063 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Partridge FA, Brown AE, Buckingham SD, et al. An automated high‐throughput system for phenotypic screening of chemical libraries on C. elegans and parasitic nematodes. Int J Parasitol Drugs Drug Resist. 2018;8(1):8‐21. 10.1016/j.ijpddr.2017.11.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Teo E, Fong S, Tolwinski N, Gruber J. Drug synergy as a strategy for compression of morbidity in a Caenorhabditis elegans model of Alzheimer's disease. GeroScience. 2020;42(3):849‐856. 10.1007/s11357-020-00169-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Wong SQ, Pontifex MG, Phelan MM, et al. α‐Methyl‐α‐phenylsuccinimide ameliorates neurodegeneration in a C. elegans model of TDP‐43 proteinopathy. Neurobiol Dis. 2018;118:40‐54. 10.1016/j.nbd.2018.06.013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Farina F, Lambert E, Commeau L, et al. The stress response factor daf‐16/FOXO is required for multiple compound families to prolong the function of neurons with Huntington’s disease. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):4014. 10.1038/s41598-017-04256-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Patten SA, Aggad D, Martinez J, et al. Neuroleptics as therapeutic compounds stabilizing neuromuscular transmission in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. JCI Insight. 2017;2(22):e97152. 10.1172/jci.insight.97152 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Mondal S, Hegarty E, Martin C, Gökçe SK, Ghorashian N, Ben‐Yakar A. Large‐scale microfluidics providing high‐resolution and high‐throughput screening of Caenorhabditis elegans poly‐glutamine aggregation model. Nat Commun. 2016;7:13023. 10.1038/ncomms13023 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Jagota S, Rajadas J. Effect of phenolic compounds against Aβ aggregation and Aβ‐induced toxicity in transgenic C. elegans . Neurochem Res. 2012;37(1):40‐48. 10.1007/s11064-011-0580-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Lublin A, Isoda F, Patel H, et al. FDA‐approved drugs that protect mammalian neurons from glucose toxicity slow aging dependent on Cbp and protect against proteotoxicity. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27762. 10.1371/journal.pone.0027762 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Su LJ, Auluck PK, Outeiro TF, et al. Compounds from an unbiased chemical screen reverse both ER‐to‐Golgi trafficking defects and mitochondrial dysfunction in Parkinson's disease models. Dis Models Mech. 2010;3(3‐4):194‐208. 10.1242/dmm.004267 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Liu W, Lin H, Mao Z, et al. Verapamil extends lifespan in Caenorhabditis elegans by inhibiting calcineurin activity and promoting autophagy. Aging. 2020;12(6):5300‐5317. 10.18632/aging.102951 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Zhang P, Zhai Y, Cregg J, Ang KK, Arkin M, Kenyon C. Stress resistance screen in a human primary cell line identifies small molecules that affect aging pathways and extend Caenorhabditis elegans’ lifespan. G3 (Bethesda, MD). 2020;10(2):849‐862. 10.1534/g3.119.400618 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Chen AL, Lum KM, Lara‐Gonzalez P, et al. Pharmacological convergence reveals a lipid pathway that regulates C. elegans lifespan. Nat Chem Biol. 2019;15(5):453‐462. 10.1038/s41589-019-0243-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Bazopoulou D, Chaudhury AR, Pantazis A, Chronis N. An automated compound screening for anti‐aging effects on the function of C. elegans sensory neurons. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):9403. 10.1038/s41598-017-09651-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Kumar S, Dietrich N, Kornfeld K. Angiotensin Converting Enzyme (ACE) inhibitor extends Caenorhabditis elegans life span. PLoS Genet. 2016;12(2):e1005866. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1005866 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Lucanic M, Garrett T, Yu I, et al. Chemical activation of a food deprivation signal extends lifespan. Aging Cell. 2016;15(5):832‐841. 10.1111/acel.12492 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Ye X, Linton JM, Schork NJ, Buck LB, Petrascheck M. A pharmacological network for lifespan extension in Caenorhabditis elegans . Aging Cell. 2014;13(2):206 ‐215. 10.1111/acel.12163 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Chin RM, Fu X, Pai MY, et al. The metabolite α‐ketoglutarate extends lifespan by inhibiting ATP synthase and TOR. Nature. 2014;510(7505):397‐401. 10.1038/nature13264 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Hummell NA, Revtovich AV, Kirienko NV. Novel immune modulators enhance Caenorhabditis elegans resistance to multiple pathogens. mSphere. 2021;6(1):e00950‐20. 10.1101/2020.10.23.352229 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Kim W, Zhu W, Hendricks GL, et al. A new class of synthetic retinoid antibiotics effective against bacterial persisters. Nature. 2018;556(7699):103‐107. 10.1038/nature26157 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Kirienko DR, Revtovich AV, High‐Content KNVA. Phenotypic screen identifies fluorouridine as an inhibitor of pyoverdine biosynthesis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence. mSphere. 2016;1(4):e00217‐e316. 10.1128/mSphere.00217-16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Rajamuthiah R, Jayamani E, Majed H, et al. Antibacterial properties of 3‐(phenylsulfonyl)‐2‐pyrazinecarbonitrile. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2015;25(22):5203‐5207. 10.1016/j.bmcl.2015.09.066 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Rajamuthiah R, Fuchs BB, Jayamani E, et al. Whole animal automated platform for drug discovery against multi‐drug resistant Staphylococcus aureus . PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e89189. 10.1371/journal.pone.0089189 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Kirienko NV, Kirienko DR, Larkins‐Ford J, Wählby C, Ruvkun G, Ausubel FM. Pseudomonas aeruginosa disrupts Caenorhabditis elegans iron homeostasis, causing a hypoxic response and death. Cell Host Microbe. 2013;13(4):406‐416. 10.1016/j.chom.2013.03.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Zhou YM, Shao L, Li JA, et al. An efficient and novel screening model for assessing the bioactivity of extracts against multidrug‐resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa using Caenorhabditis elegans . Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2011;75(9):1746‐1751. 10.1271/bbb.110290 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Coleman JJ, Okoli I, Tegos GP, et al. Characterization of plant‐derived saponin natural products against Candida albicans . ACS Chem Biol. 2010;5(3):321‐332. 10.1021/cb900243b [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Milišiūnaitė V, Kadlecová A, Žukauskaitė A, et al. Synthesis and anthelmintic activity of benzopyrano[2,3‐c]pyrazol‐4(2H)‐one derivatives. Mol Diversity. 2020;24(4):1025‐1042. 10.1007/s11030-019-10010-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Risi G, Aguilera E, Ladós E, et al. Caenorhabditis elegans infrared‐based motility assay identified new hits for nematicide drug development. Vet Sci. 2019;6(1):29. 10.3390/vetsci6010029 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Blanco MG, Vela Gurovic MS, Silbestri GF, et al. Diisopropylphenyl‐imidazole (DII): A new compound that exerts anthelmintic activity through novel molecular mechanisms. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018;12(12):e0007021. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Partridge FA, Murphy EA, Willis NJ, et al. Dihydrobenz[e][1,4]oxazepin‐2(3H)‐ones, a new anthelmintic chemotype immobilising whipworm and reducing infectivity in vivo. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11(2):e0005359. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005359 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Burns AR, Luciani GM, Musso G, et al. Caenorhabditis elegans is a useful model for anthelmintic discovery. Nat Commun. 2015;6:7485. 10.1038/ncomms8485 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. Medina PM, Ponce JM, Cruz CA. Revealing the anticancer potential of candidate drugs in vivo using Caenorhabditis elegans mutant strains. Transl Oncol. 2020;14(1):100940. 10.1016/j.tranon.2020.100940 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Ji J, Yuan J, Guo X, et al. Harmine suppresses hyper‐activated Ras‐MAPK pathway by selectively targeting oncogenic mutated Ras/Raf in Caenorhabditis elegans . Cancer Cell Int. 2019;19:159. 10.1186/s12935-019-0880-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Bae YK, Sung JY, Kim YN, et al. An in vivo C. elegans model system for screening EGFR‐inhibiting anti‐cancer drugs. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e42441. 10.1371/journal.pone.0042441 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. Zwirchmayr J, Kirchweger B, Lehner T, Tahir A, Pretsch D, Rollinger JM. A robust and miniaturized screening platform to study natural products affecting metabolism and survival in Caenorhabditis elegans . Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):12323. 10.1038/s41598-020-69186-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Wang J, He J. Swertiamarin decreases lipid accumulation dependent on 3‐ketoacyl‐coA thiolase. Biomed Pharmacother. 2019;112:108668. 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.108668 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Chow YL, Sato F. Screening of isoquinoline alkaloids for potent lipid metabolism modulation with Caenorhabditis elegans . Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2013;77(12):2405‐2412. 10.1271/bbb.130523 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Lewis JA, Wu CH, Berg H, Levine JH. The genetics of levamisole resistance in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans . Genetics. 1980;95(4):905‐928. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76. Lewis JA, Wu CH, Levine JH, Berg H. Levamisole‐resistant mutants of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans appear to lack pharmacological acetylcholine receptors. Neuroscience. 1980;5(6):967‐989. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Kaminsky R. A new class of anthelmintics effective against drug‐resistant nematodes. Nature. 2008;452(7184):176‐180. 10.1038/nature06722 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Driscoll M, Dean E, Reilly E, Bergholz E, Chalfie M. Genetic and molecular analysis of a Caenorhabditis elegans beta‐tubulin that conveys benzimidazole sensitivity. J Cell Biol. 1989;109(6 Pt 1):2993‐3003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79. Apfeld J, Alper S. What can we learn about human disease from the nematode C. elegans? Methods Mol Biol. 2018;1706:53‐75. 10.1007/978-1-4939-7471-9_4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80. Gao AW, Uit de Bos J, Sterken MG, Kammenga JE, Smith RL, Houtkooper RH. Forward and reverse genetics approaches to uncover metabolic aging pathways in Caenorhabditis elegans . Biochim Biophys Acta. 2018;1864(9 Pt A):2697‐2706. 10.1016/j.bbadis.2017.09.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81. Serrat X, Kukhtar D, Cornes E, et al. CRISPR editing of sftb‐1/SF3B1 in Caenorhabditis elegans allows the identification of synthetic interactions with cancer‐related mutations and the chemical inhibition of splicing. PLoS Genet. 2019;15(10):e1008464. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1008464 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Morley JF, Brignull HR, Weyers JJ, Morimoto RI. The threshold for polyglutamine‐expansion protein aggregation and cellular toxicity is dynamic and influenced by aging in Caenorhabditis elegans . Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99(16):10417‐10422. 10.1073/pnas.152161099 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Brignull HR, Moore FE, Tang SJ, Morimoto RI. Polyglutamine proteins at the pathogenic threshold display neuron‐specific aggregation in a pan‐neuronal Caenorhabditis elegans model. J Neurosci. 2006;26(29):7597‐7606. 10.1523/jneurosci.0990-06.2006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. Teixeira‐Castro A, Ailion M, Jalles A, et al. Neuron‐specific proteotoxicity of mutant ataxin‐3 in C. elegans: Rescue by the DAF‐16 and HSF‐1 pathways. Hum Mol Genet. 2011;20(15):2996‐3009. 10.1093/hmg/ddr203 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Styer KL, Singh V, Macosko E, Steele SE, Bargmann CI, Aballay A. Innate immunity in Caenorhabditis elegans is regulated by neurons expressing NPR‐1/GPCR. Science. 2008;322(5900):460‐464. 10.1126/science.1163673 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Singh V, Aballay A. Regulation of DAF‐16‐mediated Innate Immunity in Caenorhabditis elegans . J Biol Chem. 2009;284(51):35580‐35587. 10.1074/jbc.M109.060905 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Singh J, Aballay A. Intestinal infection regulates behavior and learning via neuroendocrine signaling. Elife. 2019;8:e50033. 10.7554/eLife.50033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. Schlotterer A, Kukudov G, Bozorgmehr F, et al. C. elegans as model for the study of high glucose‐ mediated life span reduction. Diabetes. 2009;58(11):2450‐2456. 10.2337/db09-0567 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Zhu G, Yin F, Wang L, Wei W, Jiang L, Qin J. Modeling type 2 diabetes‐like hyperglycemia in C. elegans on a microdevice. Integr Biol. 2016;8(1):30‐38. 10.1039/C5IB00243E [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Regitz C, Fitzenberger E, Mahn FL, Dußling LM, Wenzel U. Resveratrol reduces amyloid‐beta (Aβ₁₋₄₂)‐induced paralysis through targeting proteostasis in an Alzheimer model of Caenorhabditis elegans . Eur J Nutr. 2016;55(2):741‐747. 10.1007/s00394-015-0894-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Solis GM, Kardakaris R, Valentine ER, et al. Translation attenuation by minocycline enhances longevity and proteostasis in old post‐stress‐responsive organisms. Elife. 2018;7:e40314. 10.7554/eLife.40314. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Pukkila‐Worley R, Ausubel FM. Immune defense mechanisms in the Caenorhabditis elegans intestinal epithelium. Curr Opin Immunol. 2012;24(1):3‐9. 10.1016/j.coi.2011.10.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. Baur R, Beech R, Sigel E, Rufener L. Monepantel irreversibly binds to and opens Haemonchus contortus MPTL‐1 and Caenorhabditis elegans ACR‐20 receptors. Mol Pharmacol. 2015;87(1):96‐102. 10.1124/mol.114.095653 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94. Wu L, Zhou B, Oshiro‐Rapley N, et al. An ancient, unified mechanism for metformin growth inhibition in C. elegans and cancer. Cell. 2016;167(7):1705‐1718.e13. 10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.055 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Peng H, Wei Z, Luo H, et al. Inhibition of fat accumulation by hesperidin in Caenorhabditis elegans . J Agr Food Chem. 2016;64(25):5207‐5214. 10.1021/acs.jafc.6b02183 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Agotegaray M, Blanco MG, Campelo A, et al. β‐cyclodextrin coating: Improving biocompatibility of magnetic nanocomposites for biomedical applications. J Mater Sci ‐ Mater Med. 2020;31(2):22. 10.1007/s10856-020-6361-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Xiong H, Pears C, Woollard A. An enhanced C. elegans based platform for toxicity assessment. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):9839. 10.1038/s41598-017-10454-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Chiu HF, Hsiao SC, Lu YY, et al. Efficacy of protein rich pearl powder on antioxidant status in a randomized placebo‐controlled trial. J Food Drug Anal. 2018;26(1):309‐317. 10.1016/j.jfda.2017.05.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99. Wang Z, Sherwood DR. Dissection of genetic pathways in C. elegans . Methods Cell Biol. 2011;106:113‐157. 10.1016/b978-0-12-544172-8.00005-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100. Lehrbach NJ, Ji F, Sadreyev R. Next‐generation sequencing for identification of EMS‐induced mutations in Caenorhabditis elegans . Curr Protoc Mol Biol. 2017;117(7):29.1‐7.29.12. 10.1002/cpmb.27 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101. Doitsidou M, Jarriault S, Poole RJ. Next‐generation sequencing‐based approaches for mutation mapping and identification in Caenorhabditis elegans . Genetics. 2016;204(2):451‐474. 10.1534/genetics.115.186197 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102. Anderson P. Mutagenesis. Methods Cell Biol. 1995;48:31‐58. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103. Kutscher LM, Shaham S. Forward and reverse mutagenesis in C. elegans . WormBook. 2014:1‐26. 10.1895/wormbook.1.167.1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Huang YC, Pirri JK, Rayes D, et al. Gain‐of‐function mutations in the UNC‐2/CaV2alpha channel lead to excitation‐dominant synaptic transmission in Caenorhabditis elegans . Elife. 2019;8:e45905. 10.7554/eLife.45905 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105. Nass R, Hahn MK, Jessen T, McDonald PW, Carvelli L, Blakely RD. A genetic screen in Caenorhabditis elegans for dopamine neuron insensitivity to 6‐hydroxydopamine identifies dopamine transporter mutants impacting transporter biosynthesis and trafficking. J Neurochem. 2005;94(3):774‐785. 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2005.03205.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106. Liu J, Banskota AH, Critchley AT, Hafting J, Prithiviraj B. Neuroprotective effects of the cultivated Chondrus crispus in a C. elegans model of Parkinson’s disease. Marine Drugs. 2015;13(4):2250‐2266. 10.3390/md13042250 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107. Mathew MD, Mathew ND, Miller A, et al. Using C. elegans forward and reverse genetics to identify new compounds with anthelmintic activity. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(10):e0005058. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005058 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Dent JA, Smith MM, Vassilatis DK, Avery L. The genetics of ivermectin resistance in Caenorhabditis elegans . Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97(6):2674‐2679 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109. Kwok TCY, Hui K, Kostelecki W, et al. A genetic screen for dihydropyridine (dhp)‐resistant worms reveals new residues required for DHP‐blockage of mammalian calcium channels. PLoS Genet. 2008;4(5):e1000067. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000067 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110. Ung H, Hall R, Kikis E. Chemical mutagenesis of Caenorhabditis elegans uncovers genetic modifiers of huntingtin protein aggregation. Micro Publ Biol. 2020;2020:10.17912/micropub.biology.000202. 10.17912/micropub.biology.000202 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111. Kawamura K, Maruyama IN. Forward genetic screen for Caenorhabditis elegans mutants with a shortened locomotor healthspan. G3 (Bethesda, Md). 2019;9(8):2415‐2423. 10.1534/g3.119.400241 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112. Sheng M, Hosseinzadeh A, Muralidharan SV, Gaur R, Selstam E, Tuck S. Aberrant fat metabolism in Caenorhabditis elegans mutants with defects in the defecation motor program. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0124515. 10.1371/journal.pone.0124515 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113. Heigwer F, Port F, Boutros M. RNA interference (RNAi) screening in Drosophila. Genetics. 2018;208(3):853‐874. 10.1534/genetics.117.300077 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114. Yang X, Niu L, Zhang W, et al. Robust RNAi‐mediated resistance to infection of seven potyvirids in soybean expressing an intron hairpin NIb RNA. Transgenic Res. 2017;26(5):665‐676. 10.1007/s11248-017-0041-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115. Rytlewski JA, Beronja S. RNAi in the mouse: rapid and affordable gene function studies in a vertebrate system. WIREs. 2015;4(1):45‐57. 10.1002/wdev.164 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116. Kamath RS, Ahringer J. Genome‐wide RNAi screening in Caenorhabditis elegans . Methods. 2003;30(4):313‐321. 10.1016/s1046-2023(03)00050-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117. Rual JF, Ceron J, Koreth J, et al. Toward improving Caenorhabditis elegans phenome mapping with an ORFeome‐based RNAi library. Genome Res. 2004;14(10b):2162‐2168. 10.1101/gr.2505604 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118. Ashrafi K, Chang FY, Watts JL, et al. Genome‐wide RNAi analysis of Caenorhabditis elegans fat regulatory genes. Nature. 2003;421(6920):268‐272. 10.1038/nature01279 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119. Gönczy P, Echeverri C, Oegema K, et al. Functional genomic analysis of cell division in C. elegans using RNAi of genes on chromosome III. Nature. 2000;408(6810):331‐336. 10.1038/35042526 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120. Zugasti O, Thakur N, Belougne J, et al. A quantitative genome‐wide RNAi screen in C. elegans for antifungal innate immunity genes. BMC Biol. 2016;14:35. 10.1186/s12915-016-0256-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121. Mao Y‐Q, Han S‐F, Zhang S‐L, et al. An approach using Caenorhabditis elegans screening novel targets to suppress tumour cell proliferation. Cell Prolif. 2020;53(6):e12832. 10.1111/cpr.12832 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122. Liachko NF, Saxton AD, McMillan PJ, et al. Genome wide analysis reveals heparan sulfate epimerase modulates TDP‐43 proteinopathy. PLoS Genet. 2019;15(12):e1008526. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1008526 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123. Calixto A, Chelur D, Topalidou I, Chen X, Chalfie M . Enhanced neuronal RNAi in C. elegans using SID‐1. Nat Methods. 2010;7(7):554‐559. 10.1038/nmeth.1463 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124. Kennedy S, Wang D, Ruvkun G. A conserved siRNA‐degrading RNase negatively regulates RNA interference in C. elegans . Nature. 2004;427(6975):645‐649. 10.1038/nature02302 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125. Wang D, Kennedy S, Conte D Jr, et al. Somatic misexpression of germline P granules and enhanced RNA interference in retinoblastoma pathway mutants. Nature. 2005;436(7050):593‐597. 10.1038/nature04010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126. Sieburth D, Ch'ng Q, Dybbs M, et al. Systematic analysis of genes required for synapse structure and function. Nature. 2005;436(7050):510‐517. 10.1038/nature03809 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127. Hsu PD, Lander ES, Zhang F. Development and applications of CRISPR‐Cas9 for genome engineering. Cell. 2014;157(6):1262‐1278. 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128. Maggio I, Gonçalves MA. Genome editing at the crossroads of delivery, specificity, and fidelity. Trends Biotechnol. 2015;33(5):280‐291. 10.1016/j.tibtech.2015.02.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129. Frøkjær‐Jensen C. Transposon‐assisted genetic engineering with Mos1‐Mediated Single‐Copy Insertion (MosSCI). Methods Mol Biol. 2015;1327:49‐58. 10.1007/978-1-4939-2842-2_5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130. Dickinson DJ, Goldstein B. CRISPR‐based methods for Caenorhabditis elegans genome engineering. Genetics. 2016;202(3):885‐901. 10.1534/genetics.115.182162 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131. Nance J, Frokjaer‐Jensen C. The Caenorhabditis elegans transgenic toolbox. Genetics. 2019;212(4):959‐990. 10.1534/genetics.119.301506 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132. Baiga TJ, Guo H, Xing Y, et al. Metabolite induction of Caenorhabditis elegans dauer larvae arises via transport in the pharynx. ACS Chem Biol. 2008;3(5):294‐304. 10.1021/cb700269e [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133. Kamal M, Moshiri H, Magomedova L, et al. The marginal cells of the Caenorhabditis elegans pharynx scavenge cholesterol and other hydrophobic small molecules. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):3938. 10.1038/s41467-019-11908-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134. Scharf A, Piechulek A, von Mikecz A. Effect of nanoparticles on the biochemical and behavioral aging phenotype of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans . ACS Nano. 2013;7(12):10695‐10703. 10.1021/nn403443r [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135. Page AP. The sensory amphidial structures of Caenorhabditis elegans are involved in macrocyclic lactone uptake and anthelmintic resistance. Int J Parasitol. 2018;48(13):1035‐1042. 10.1016/j.ijpara.2018.06.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136. Kwok TC, Ricker N, Fraser R, et al. A small‐molecule screen in C. elegans yields a new calcium channel antagonist. Nature. 2006;441(7089):91‐95. 10.1038/nature04657 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137. Hu Y, Xiao SH, Aroian RV. The new anthelmintic tribendimidine is an L‐type (levamisole and pyrantel) nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2009;3(8):e499. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000499 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138. Tam ZY, Gruber J, Ng LF, Halliwell B, Gunawan R. Effects of lithium on age‐related decline in mitochondrial turnover and function in Caenorhabditis elegans . J Gerontol: Series A. 2014;69(7):810‐820. 10.1093/gerona/glt210 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 139. van Haaften G, Vastenhouw NL, Nollen EAA, Plasterk RHA, Tijsterman M. Gene interactions in the DNA damage‐response pathway identified by genome‐wide RNA‐interference analysis of synthetic lethality. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101(35):12992. 10.1073/pnas.0403131101 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140. Moy TI, Ball AR, Anklesaria Z, Casadei G, Lewis K, Ausubel FM. Identification of novel antimicrobials using a live‐animal infection model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103(27):10414‐10419. 10.1073/pnas.0604055103 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 141. Ben‐Yakar A, Bourgeois F. Ultrafast laser nanosurgery in microfluidics for genome‐wide screenings. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2009;20(1):100‐105. 10.1016/j.copbio.2009.01.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 142. Zheng SQ, Ding AJ, Li GP, Wu GS, Luo HR. Drug absorption efficiency in Caenorhbditis elegans delivered by different methods. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56877. 10.1371/journal.pone.0056877 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 143. Edwards C, Canfield J, Copes N, Rehan M, Lipps D, Bradshaw PC. D‐beta‐hydroxybutyrate extends lifespan in C. elegans . Aging. 2014;6(8):621‐644. 10.18632/aging.100683 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 144. Kim DH. Bacteria and the aging and longevity of Caenorhabditis elegans . Annu Rev Genet. 2013;47:233‐246. 10.1146/annurev-genet-111212-133352 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 145. Cabreiro F, Gems D. Worms need microbes too: Microbiota, health and aging in Caenorhabditis elegans . EMBO Mol Med. 2013;5(9):1300‐1310. 10.1002/emmm.201100972 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 146. Burns AR, Wallace IM, Wildenhain J, et al. A predictive model for drug bioaccumulation and bioactivity in Caenorhabditis elegans . Nat Chem Biol. 2010;6(7):549‐557. 10.1038/nchembio.380 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 147. van Dijk FS, Cobben JM, Kariminejad A, et al. Osteogenesis imperfecta: A review with clinical examples. Molecular Syndromology. 2011;2(1):1‐20. 10.1159/000332228 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 148. Johnstone IL, Shafi Y, Barry JD. Molecular analysis of mutations in the Caenorhabditis elegans collagen gene dpy‐7. Embo J. 1992;11(11):3857‐3863. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 149. McColl G, Roberts BR, Pukala TL, et al. Utility of an improved model of amyloid‐beta (Aβ₁₋₄₂) toxicity in Caenorhabditis elegans for drug screening for Alzheimer's disease. Mol Neurodegener. 2012;7:57. 10.1186/1750-1326-7-57 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 150. Vartiainen S, Aarnio V, Lakso M, Wong G. Increased lifespan in transgenic Caenorhabditis elegans overexpressing human alpha‐synuclein. Exp Gerontol. 2006;41(9):871‐876. 10.1016/j.exger.2006.05.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 151. Perlmutter DH. The role of autophagy in alpha‐1‐antitrypsin deficiency: A specific cellular response in genetic diseases associated with aggregation‐prone proteins. Autophagy. 2006;2(4):258‐263. 10.4161/auto.2882 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 152. Silverman G, Pak S, Perlmutter D. Disorders of protein misfolding: Alpha‐1‐antitrypsin deficiency as prototype. J Pediatr. 2013;163(2):320‐326. 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.03.077 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 153. Gitler AD, Dhillon P, Shorter J. Neurodegenerative disease: Models, mechanisms, and a new hope. Dis Models Mech. 2017;10(5):499. 10.1242/dmm.030205 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 154. Mattson MP, Magnus T. Ageing and neuronal vulnerability. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7(4):278‐294. 10.1038/nrn1886 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 155. Chen X, Barclay JW, Burgoyne RD, Morgan A, et al. Using C. elegans to discover therapeutic compounds for ageing‐associated neurodegenerative diseases. Chemistry Central Journal. 2015;9:65. 10.1534/genetics.115.177998 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 156. Ma L, Zhao Y, Chen Y, Cheng B, Peng A, Huang K. Caenorhabditis elegans as a model system for target identification and drug screening against neurodegenerative diseases. Eur J Pharmacol. 2018;819:169‐180. 10.1016/j.ejphar.2017.11.051 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 157. Brignull HR, Morley JF, Garcia SM, Morimoto RI. Modeling polyglutamine pathogenesis in C. elegans . Methods Enzymol. 2006;412:256‐282. 10.1016/S0076-6879(06)12016-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 158. Lakso M, Vartiainen S, Moilanen AM, et al. Dopaminergic neuronal loss and motor deficits in Caenorhabditis elegans overexpressing human alpha‐synuclein. J Neurochem. 2003;86(1):165‐172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 159. Hamamichi S, Rivas RN, Knight AL, Cao S, Caldwell KA, Caldwell GA. Hypothesis‐based RNAi screening identifies neuroprotective genes in a Parkinson's disease model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105(2):728‐733. 10.1073/pnas.0711018105 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 160. Saldi TK, Ash PE, Wilson G, et al. TDP‐1, the Caenorhabditis elegans ortholog of TDP‐43, limits the accumulation of double‐stranded RNA. EMBO J. 2014;33(24):2947‐2966. 10.15252/embj.201488740 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 161. Yao C, Johnson WM, Gao Y, et al. Kinase inhibitors arrest neurodegeneration in cell and C. elegans models of LRRK2 toxicity. Hum Mol Genet. 2013;22(2):328‐344. 10.1093/hmg/dds431 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 162. Corsi AK, Wightman B, Chalfie M. A transparent window into biology: A primer on Caenorhabditis elegans . Genetics. 2015;200(2):387‐407. 10.1534/genetics.115.176099 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 163. Samuelson AV, Carr CE, Ruvkun G. Gene activities that mediate increased life span of C. elegans insulin‐like signaling mutants. Genes Dev. 2007;21(22):2976‐2994. 10.1101/gad.1588907 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 164. Uno M, Nishida E. Lifespan‐regulating genes in C. elegans . NPJ Aging Mech Dis. 2016;2:16010. 10.1038/npjamd.2016.10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 165. Kenyon C, Chang J, Gensch E, Rudner A, Tabtiang RA. A C. elegans mutant that lives twice as long as wild type. Nature. 1993;366(6454):461‐464. 10.1038/366461a0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 166. Apfeld J, Kenyon C. Regulation of lifespan by sensory perception in Caenorhabditis elegans . Nature. 1999;402(6763):804‐809. 10.1038/45544 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 167. Kinser HE, Pincus Z. High‐throughput screening in the C. elegans nervous system. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2017;80:192‐197. 10.1016/j.mcn.2016.06.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 168. O'Reilly LP, Luke CJ, Perlmutter DH, Silverman GA, Pak SC. C. elegans in high‐throughput drug discovery. Adv Drug Del Rev. 2014;70:247‐253. 10.1016/j.addr.2013.12.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 169. Conery AL, Larkins‐Ford J, Ausubel FM, Kirienko NV. High‐throughput screening for novel anti‐infectives using a C. elegans pathogenesis model. Curr Protoc Chem Biol. 2014;6(1):25‐37. 10.1002/9780470559277.ch130160 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 170. Leung CK, Wang Y, Malany S, et al. An ultra high‐throughput, whole‐animal screen for small molecule modulators of a specific genetic pathway in Caenorhabditis elegans . PLoS One. 2013;8(4):e62166. 10.1371/journal.pone.0062166 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 171. Petrascheck M, Ye X, Buck LB. An antidepressant that extends lifespan in adult Caenorhabditis elegans . Nature. 2007;450(7169):553‐556. 10.1038/nature05991 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 172. Perni M, Casford S, Aprile FA, et al. Automated behavioral analysis of large C. elegans populations using a wide field‐of‐view tracking platform. J Vis Exp. 2018;(141):e58643. 10.3791/58643 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 173. Perni M, Challa PK, Kirkegaard JB, et al. Massively parallel C. elegans tracking provides multi‐dimensional fingerprints for phenotypic discovery. J Neurosci Methods. 2018;306:57‐67. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2018.02.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 174. Bargmann CI. Neurobiology of the Caenorhabditis elegans genome. Science. 1998;282(5396):2028‐2033. 10.1126/science.282.5396.2028 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 175. Liu Q, Kidd PB, Dobosiewicz M, Bargmann CI. C. elegans AWA olfactory neurons fire calcium‐mediated all‐or‐none action potentials. Cell. 2018;175(1):57‐70 e17. 10.1016/j.cell.2018.08.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 176. Liu P, Ge Q, Chen B, Salkoff L, Kotlikoff MI, Wang ZW. Genetic dissection of ion currents underlying all‐or‐none action potentials in C. elegans body‐wall muscle cells. J Physiol. 2011;589(Pt 1):101‐117. 10.1113/jphysiol.2010.200683 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 177. Shtonda B, Avery L. CCA‐1, EGL‐19 and EXP‐2 currents shape action potentials in the Caenorhabditis elegans pharynx. J Exp Biol. 2005;208(11):2177‐2190. 10.1242/jeb.01615 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 178. Link CD. Expression of human beta‐amyloid peptide in transgenic Caenorhabditis elegans . Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1995;92(20):9368‐9372. 10.1073/pnas.92.20.9368 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 179. Dickinson DJ, Ward JD, Reiner DJ, Goldstein B. Engineering the Caenorhabditis elegans genome using Cas9‐triggered homologous recombination. Nat Methods. 2013;10(10):1028‐1034. 10.1038/nmeth.2641 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 180. Baskoylu SN, Yersak J, O'Hern P, et al. Single copy/knock‐in models of ALS SOD1 in C. elegans suggest loss and gain of function have different contributions to cholinergic and glutamatergic neurodegeneration. PLOS Genet. 2018;14(10):e1007682. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1007682 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 181. Baskoylu SN, Chapkis N, Unsal B, et al. Disrupted autophagy and neuronal dysfunction in C. elegans knock‐in models of FUS amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. bioRxiv. 2019:799932. 10.1101/799932 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 182. Guha S, Fischer S, Johnson GVW, Nehrke K. Tauopathy‐associated tau modifications selectively impact neurodegeneration and mitophagy in a novel C. elegans single‐copy transgenic model. Mol Neurodegeneration. 2020;15:65. 10.1186/s13024-02000410-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 183. Lee AL, Ung HM, Sands LP, Kikis EA. A new Caenorhabditis elegans model of human huntingtin 513 aggregation and toxicity in body wall muscles. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):e0173644. 10.1371/journal.pone.0173644 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 184. Faber PW, Alter JR, MacDonald ME, Hart AC. Polyglutamine‐mediated dysfunction and apoptotic death of a Caenorhabditis elegans sensory neuron. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96(1):179‐184. 10.1073/pnas.96.1.179 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 185. Parker JA, Connolly JB, Wellington C, Hayden M, Dausset J, Neri C. Expanded polyglutamines in Caenorhabditis elegans cause axonal abnormalities and severe dysfunction of PLM mechanosensory neurons without cell death. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98(23):13318‐13323. 10.1073/pnas.231476398 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 186. Drake J, Link CD, Butterfield DA. Oxidative stress precedes fibrillar deposition of Alzheimer's disease amyloid beta‐peptide (1–42) in a transgenic Caenorhabditis elegans model. Neurobiol Aging. 2003;24(3):415‐420. 10.1016/s0197-4580(02)00225-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 187. Fong S, Teo E, Ng LF, et al. Energy crisis precedes global metabolic failure in a novel Caenorhabditis elegans Alzheimer disease model. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):33781. 10.1038/srep33781 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 188. Wu Y, Wu Z, Butko P, et al. Amyloid‐beta‐induced pathological behaviors are suppressed by Ginkgo biloba extract EGb 761 and ginkgolides in transgenic Caenorhabditis elegans . J Neurosci. 2006;26(50):13102‐13113. 10.1523/jneurosci.3448-06.2006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 189. Kraemer BC, Zhang B, Leverenz JB, Thomas JH, Trojanowski JQ, Schellenberg GD. Neurodegeneration and defective neurotransmission in a Caenorhabditis elegans model of tauopathy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100(17):9980‐9985. 10.1073/pnas.1533448100 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 190. Guha S, Fischer S, Johnson GVW, Nehrke K. Tauopathy‐associated tau modifications selectively impact neurodegeneration and mitophagy in a novel C. elegans single‐copy transgenic model. Mol Neurodegener. 2020;15(1):65. 10.1186/s13024-020-00410-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 191. Kuwahara T, Koyama A, Koyama S, et al. A systematic RNAi screen reveals involvement of endocytic pathway in neuronal dysfunction in alpha‐synuclein transgenic C. elegans. Hum Mol Genet. 2008;17(19):2997‐3009. 10.1093/hmg/ddn198 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 192. Kuwahara T, Koyama A, Gengyo‐Ando K, et al. Familial Parkinson mutant alpha‐synuclein causes dopamine neuron dysfunction in transgenic Caenorhabditis elegans . J Biol Chem. 2006;281(1):334‐340. 10.1074/jbc.M504860200 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 193. Nass R, Hall DH, Miller DM 3rd, Blakely RD. Neurotoxin‐induced degeneration of dopamine neurons in Caenorhabditis elegans . Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99(5):3264‐3269. 10.1073/pnas.042497999 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 194. Oeda T, Shimohama S, Kitagawa N, et al. Oxidative stress causes abnormal accumulation of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis‐related mutant SOD1 in transgenic Caenorhabditis elegans . Hum Mol Genet. 2001;10(19):2013‐2023. 10.1093/hmg/10.19.2013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 195. Gidalevitz T, Krupinski T, Garcia S, Morimoto RI. Destabilizing protein polymorphisms in the genetic background direct phenotypic expression of mutant SOD1 toxicity. PLoS Genet. 2009;5(3):e1000399. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000399 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 196. Wang J, Farr GW, Hall DH, et al. An ALS‐linked mutant SOD1 produces a locomotor defect associated with aggregation and synaptic dysfunction when expressed in neurons of Caenorhabditis elegans . PLoS Genet. 2009;5(1):e1000350. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000350 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 197. Liachko NF, Guthrie CR, Kraemer BC. Phosphorylation promotes neurotoxicity in a Caenorhabditis elegans model of TDP‐43 proteinopathy. J Neurosci. 2010;30(48):16208‐16219. 10.1523/jneurosci.2911-10.2010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 198. Ash PE, Zhang YJ, Roberts CM, et al. Neurotoxic effects of TDP‐43 overexpression in C. elegans . Hum Mol Genet. 2010;19(16):3206‐3218. 10.1093/hmg/ddq230 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 199. Vaccaro A, Tauffenberger A, Ash PE, Carlomagno Y, Petrucelli L, Parker JA. TDP‐1/TDP‐43 regulates stress signaling and age‐dependent proteotoxicity in Caenorhabditis elegans . PLoS Genet. 2012;8(7):e1002806. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002806 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 200. Murakami T, Yang SP, Xie L, et al. ALS mutations in FUS cause neuronal dysfunction and death in Caenorhabditis elegans by a dominant gain‐of‐function mechanism. Hum Mol Genet. 2012;21(1):1‐9. 10.1093/hmg/ddr417 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 201. Witan H, Kern A, Koziollek‐Drechsler I, Wade R, Behl C, Clement AM. Heterodimer formation of wild‐type and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis‐causing mutant Cu/Zn‐superoxide dismutase induces toxicity independent of protein aggregation. Hum Mol Genet. 2008;17(10):1373‐1385. 10.1093/hmg/ddn025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 202. van der Goot AT, Zhu W, Vazquez‐Manrique RP, et al. Delaying aging and the aging‐associated decline in protein homeostasis by inhibition of tryptophan degradation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109(37):14912‐14917. 10.1073/pnas.1203083109 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 203. Jadiya P, Fatima S, Baghel T, Mir SS, Nazir A. A systematic RNAi screen of neuroprotective genes identifies novel modulators of alpha‐synuclein‐associated effects in transgenic Caenorhabditis elegans . Mol Neurobiol. 2016;53(9):6288‐6300. 10.1007/s12035-015-9517-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 204. Knight Adam L, Yan X, Hamamichi S, et al. The glycolytic enzyme, GPI, Is a functionally conserved modifier of dopaminergic neurodegeneration in Parkinson’s models. Cell Metab. 2014;20(1):145‐157. 10.1016/j.cmet.2014.04.017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 205. Silva MC, Fox S, Beam M, Thakkar H, Amaral MD, Morimoto RI. A genetic screening strategy identifies novel regulators of the proteostasis network. PLoS Genet. 2011;7(12):e1002438. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002438 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 206. van Ham TJ, Holmberg MA, van der Goot AT, et al. Identification of MOAG‐4/SERF as a regulator of age‐related proteotoxicity. Cell. 2010;142(4):601‐612. 10.1016/j.cell.2010.07.020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 207. Holden‐Dye L, Walker RJ. Anthelmintic drugs and nematicides: Studies in Caenorhabditis elegans . WormBook. 2014;1‐29. 10.1895/wormbook.1.143.2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 208. Weng HB, Chen HX, Wang MW. Innovation in neglected tropical disease drug discovery and development. Infect Dis Poverty. 2018;7(1):67. 10.1186/s40249-018-0444-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 209. Wolstenholme AJ, Fairweather I, Prichard R, von Samson‐Himmelstjerna G, Sangster NC. Drug resistance in veterinary helminths. Trends Parasitol. 2004;20(10):469‐476. 10.1016/j.pt.2004.07.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 210. Osei‐Atweneboana MY, Eng JK, Boakye DA, Gyapong JO, Prichard RK. Prevalence and intensity of Onchocerca volvulus infection and efficacy of ivermectin in endemic communities in Ghana: A two‐phase epidemiological study. Lancet. 2007;369(9578):2021‐2029. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60942-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 211. Kaminsky R, Bapst B, Stein PA, et al. Differences in efficacy of monepantel, derquantel and abamectin against multi‐resistant nematodes of sheep. Parasitol Res. 2011;109(1):19‐23. 10.1007/s00436-010-2216-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 212. Geurden T, Hoste H, Jacquiet P, et al. Anthelmintic resistance and multidrug resistance in sheep gastro‐intestinal nematodes in France, Greece and Italy. Vet Parasitol. 2014;201(1‐2):59‐66. 10.1016/j.vetpar.2014.01.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 213. Krucken J, Fraundorfer K, Mugisha JC, et al. Reduced efficacy of albendazole against Ascaris lumbricoides in Rwandan schoolchildren. Int J Parasitol Drugs Drug Resist. 2017;7(3):262‐271. 10.1016/j.ijpddr.2017.06.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 214. Ward JD. Rendering the intractable more tractable: tools from caenorhabditis elegans ripe for import into parasitic nematodes. Genetics. 2015;201(4):1279‐1294. 10.1534/genetics.115.182717 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 215. Katiki LM, Ferreira JF, Zajac AM, et al. Caenorhabditis elegans as a model to screen plant extracts and compounds as natural anthelmintics for veterinary use. Vet Parasitol. 2011;182(2‐4):264‐268. 10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.05.020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 216. Kumarasingha R, Palombo EA, Bhave M, et al. Enhancing a search for traditional medicinal plants with anthelmintic action by using wild type and stress reporter Caenorhabditis elegans strains as screening tools. Int J Parasitol. 2014;44(5):291‐298. 10.1016/j.ijpara.2014.01.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 217. Richmond JE, Jorgensen EM. One GABA and two acetylcholine receptors function at the C. elegans neuromuscular junction. Nat Neurosci. 1999;2(9):791‐797. 10.1038/12160 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 218. Rayes D, Flamini M, Hernando G, Bouzat C. Activation of single nicotinic receptor channels from Caenorhabditis elegans muscle. Mol Pharmacol. 2007;71(5):1407‐1415. 10.1124/mol.106.033514 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 219. Fonseca‐Salamanca F, Martinez‐Grueiro MM, Martinez‐Fernandez AR. Nematocidal activity of nitazoxanide in laboratory models. Parasitol Res. 2003;91(4):321‐324. 10.1007/s00436-003-0974-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 220. Weeks JC, Robinson KJ, Lockery SR, Roberts WM. Anthelmintic drug actions in resistant and susceptible C. elegans revealed by electrophysiological recordings in a multichannel microfluidic device. Int J Parasitol Drugs Drug Resist. 2018;8(3):607‐628. 10.1016/j.ijpddr.2018.10.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 221. Geary TG, Woo K, McCarthy JS, et al. Unresolved issues in anthelmintic pharmacology for helminthiases of humans. Int J Parasitol. 2010;40(1):1‐13. 10.1016/j.ijpara.2009.11.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 222. Atchison WD, Geary TG, Manning B, VandeWaa EA, Thompson DP. Comparative neuromuscular blocking actions of levamisole and pyrantel‐type anthelmintics on rat and gastrointestinal nematode somatic muscle. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1992;112(1):133‐143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 223. Martin RJ, Verma S, Levandoski M, et al. Drug resistance and neurotransmitter receptors of nematodes: Recent studies on the mode of action of levamisole. Parasitology. 2005;131(Suppl):S71‐S84. 10.1017/S0031182005008668 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 224. Qian H, Martin RJ, Robertson AP. Pharmacology of N‐, L‐, and B‐subtypes of nematode nAChR resolved at the single‐channel level in Ascaris suum. FASEB J. 2006;20(14):2606‐2608. 10.1096/fj.06-6264fje [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 225. Sloan MA, Reaves BJ, Maclean MJ, Storey BE, Wolstenholme AJ. Expression of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunits from parasitic nematodes in Caenorhabditis elegans . Mol Biochem Parasitol. 2015;204(1):44‐50. 10.1016/j.molbiopara.2015.12.006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 226. Weeks JC, Roberts WM, Leasure C, et al. Sertraline, paroxetine, and chlorpromazine are rapidly acting anthelmintic drugs capable of clinical repurposing. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):975. 10.1038/s41598-017-18457-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
