Skip to main content
PLOS Genetics logoLink to PLOS Genetics
. 2022 Aug 23;18(8):e1010357. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1010357

Endocrine modulation of primary chemosensory neurons regulates Drosophila courtship behavior

Matthew R Meiselman 1,2,*, Anindya Ganguly 2,3, Anupama Dahanukar 1,2,3, Michael E Adams 1,2,3,4,*
Editor: Lynn M Riddiford5
PMCID: PMC9439213  PMID: 35998183

Abstract

The decision to engage in courtship depends on external cues from potential mates and internal cues related to maturation, health, and experience. Hormones allow for coordinated conveyance of such information to peripheral tissues. Here, we show Ecdysis-Triggering Hormone (ETH) is critical for courtship inhibition after completion of copulation in Drosophila melanogaster. ETH deficiency relieves post-copulation courtship inhibition (PCCI) and increases male-male courtship. ETH appears to modulate perception and attractiveness of potential mates by direct action on primary chemosensory neurons. Knockdown of ETH receptor (ETHR) expression in GR32A-expressing neurons leads to reduced ligand sensitivity and elevated male-male courtship. We find OR67D also is critical for normal levels of PCCI after mating. ETHR knockdown in OR67D-expressing neurons or GR32A-expressing neurons relieves PCCI. Finally, ETHR silencing in the corpus allatum (CA), the sole source of juvenile hormone, also relieves PCCI; treatment with the juvenile hormone analog methoprene partially restores normal post-mating behavior. We find that ETH, a stress-sensitive reproductive hormone, appears to coordinate multiple sensory modalities to guide Drosophila male courtship behaviors, especially after mating.

Author summary

The decision of when to reproduce is paramount for organismal survival. In models like mice and flies, we have a comprehensive understanding of neuronal substrates for perception of mates and courtship drive, but how these substrates adapt to malleable internal and external environments remains unclear. Here, we show that post-mating refractoriness depends upon a peptide hormone, Ecdysis-Triggering Hormone (ETH). We show repression of courtship toward recently-mated females depends upon pheromone cues and that ETH deficiency impairs perception of female matedness. ETH signaling appears to promote the activity and function of pheromone-sensing primary olfactory and gustatory sensory neurons. Additionally, ETH sets internal levels of Juvenile Hormone, a hormone known to inhibit courtship drive in flies. Elimination of ETH or its receptor in primary sensory neurons or the glandular source of Juvenile Hormone reduces male post-copulation courtship inhibition (PCCI), causing continued courtship toward female counterparts after successful mating. Our data suggest ETH and its targets are critical for post-mating refractoriness in males.

Introduction

Modulation of sensory perception is critical for prioritization of appropriate behaviors under varying physiological conditions. For example, in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, mating is costly for both sexes [1,2], and the decision to engage in mating behaviors must be weighed with internal state and probability of success [3,4]. Drosophila males weigh these decisions with a network of neurons masculinized by the presence of the sex determination transcription factor, fruitless [5]. Reproductive decision-making and consequent behavioral output in male flies are dictated by the activity of P1 neurons [6,7]. These neurons integrate olfactory, gustatory, visual, and hormonal cues to determine the levels of arousal and the ultimate decision to engage in courtship activity [810]. In addition to direct modulation of the arousal hub, it appears that primary sensory neurons necessary for mate perception also are modulated by hormonal state [11]. This layered control allows for multifactorial integration into the ultimate decision of whether or not to mate.

We recently reported that Ecdysis Triggering Hormone (ETH) persists into the adult stage where it modulates juvenile hormone levels, fecundity and reproductive physiology in response to stress [12,13]. Here, we characterize postcopulation courtship inhibition (PCCI) in males and show that blocking ETH release or elimination of Inka cells, the sole source of ETH, relieves (PCCI) and increases male courtship overtures toward conspecific females and males. Inappropriate courtship toward males and mated females after mating suggests ETH-deficiency obviates not only the variety of courtship-inhibiting olfactory and gustatory cues that distinguish each [1416], but also any changes in memory or internal state that result from successful copulation [17]. Furthermore, ETH receptor (ETHR) knockdown in aversive pheromone-sensing neurons that express GR32A and OR67D relieves PCCI and promotes male-male courtship, suggesting that ETH signaling modulates courtship behavior by affecting pheromone sensitivity. Juvenile hormone (JH) deficiency also relieves PCCI; treatment of ETH-deficient males with the juvenile hormone analog methoprene (JHA) reestablishes a decline in courtship intensity after mating. We conclude that ETH, a stress-sensitive reproductive hormone, is a potent modulator of courtship, and necessary for normal levels of PCCI.

Results

ETH deficiency disinhibits post-copulation male courtship behavior

Normal levels of male courtship behavior depend upon JH signaling [18]. We therefore examined whether males deficient in ETH, which stimulates synthesis and release of JH [12,19,20], exhibit impaired mating efficacy. Contrary to expectation, we found that ETH deficiency, caused either by expression of the pro-apoptotic protein reaper in the Inka cells during the adult-stage (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-Reaper) [21], or by adult-specific prevention of ETH release by overexpression of the temperature-sensitive version of the dynamin mutant, shibirets (ETH-Gal4>UAS-shibirets) [22], increases male-female copulation success during a ten-minute test interval (Fig 1A and 1B). Furthermore, injection of ETH into wild-type Canton-S males just before pairing with a virgin female dramatically attenuates courtship (Fig 1C). Additionally, both Inka cell-ablation and Inka cell secretion-blocking cause a substantial increase in courtship toward conspecific males (Fig 1D and 1E, S1A and S1C Fig). Most strikingly, we found that ETH-deficient male courtship toward females does not decrease after successful mating, as was observed in wild-type flies and genetic control flies (Fig 1F and 1G, S1B, S1D and S1E Fig). We refer henceforth to this decrease as “post-copulatory courtship inhibition” or PCCI. Elevated courtship after mating also was observed in males with ecdysone receptor knockdown in Inka cells (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-EcR-RNAi), which reduces ETH gene expression [23], suggesting the phenomenon is ETH-dependent (S1F Fig). This is unlikely to be a consequence of incomplete mating, as sperm were observed in females after mating to ETH-deficient males (S2A–S2C Fig), copulation duration for ETH-deficient males was slightly longer than controls (S2D and S2E Fig), and we showed in previous work that ETH-deficient males could successfully produce progeny, albeit at a reduced rate [12].

Fig 1. ETH-deficiency increases frequency of male courtship behavior toward females, males, and mated females.

Fig 1

(A-B) Cumulative totals of males mating successfully with virgin Canton-S females during a ten-minute pairing interval. Male genotypes are: (A) Inka cell-ablated, (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-Reaper)(Mantel-Cox test, n = 70–77), (B) Inka cell secretion-blocked, (ETH-Gal4>UAS-Shibirets) and genetic controls (Mantel-Cox test, n = 51–61). (C) Male courtship index toward wt females beginning 45 minutes after faux injection (no liquid ejected from capillary), saline injected, or injected with stated amount of ETH in saline (ANOVA, n = 12–20). (D-E) Male courtship index (time spent courting over total time, 600s) toward Canton-S males for Inka cell-ablated (D), Inka cell secretion-blocked (E), and genetic controls (One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), n = 15–20). (F) Comparison of courtship index before (Blue dots) and after (Red dots) successful mating for Wt (left), controls (middle) and Inka cell-ablated males (right)(bootstrap, n = 20) (G) Time courting 200 seconds before mating and 600 seconds after dismount for an example Inka cell-ablated male and genetic controls. Black bars represent seconds performing courtship behavior. ns p > .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; **** p < .0001.

Male flies typically reduce courtship overtures after mating [15]. This reduction depends upon internal cues from copulation reporting neurons, which suppress courtship-promoting NPF neurons [3,24], and sensing of external cues that signal female refractoriness [2527]. Males transfer pheromones, including cis-Vaccenyl Acetate (cVA) and 7-tricosene (7T) to females during copulation. This contributes to male aversive behavior during subsequent encounters with females [28]. ETH-deficient males may therefore either be impaired as “senders” (inability to deposit anti-aphrodisiacs) or “receivers” (inability to perceive or integrate information from anti-aphrodisiacs). To clarify, we performed a “Mate-and-Switch” experiment by pairing ETH-deficient and wild-type males with females simultaneously, and swapping their former mates after completion of mating (Fig 2A). Canton-S (control) males court females formerly mated to ETH-deficient males at low levels, whereas ETH-deficient males courted mated females at high levels (Fig 2B). These findings suggest that ETH modulates the internal state of receiver males to tune courtship. Taken together, ETH levels appear to be critical for maintaining normal courtship behavior after mating.

Fig 2. ETH deficiency impairs perception.

Fig 2

(A) Diagram for Mate and Switch experiment. Wt and ETH-deficient males court and mate wt female counterparts (1a-2a, 1b-2b, respectively). After completion of mating, ETH-deficient males are placed with females mated to wt male counterparts (3a), and wt males are placed with females recently mated to ETH-deficient males from the opposite panel (3b). (B) Courtship index after mate and switch for ETH-Deficient and wt males after mating and switching (Mann-Whitney U, n = 15). (C) Male post-copulation courtship index for flies with ETHR knocked down pan-neuronally (Elav-Gal4>UAS-ETHR-RNAi) and genetic controls (ANOVA, n = 20–21).(D) Male post-copulation courtship index for flies with ETHR knocked down pan-neuronally after eclosion only (Elav-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-ETHR-RNAi) and genetic controls (ANOVA, n = 17–20).ns, p > .05; *** p < .001; **** p < .0001.

ETHR-silencing impairs GR32A neuron function and elevates male-male courtship

Males and mated females rely upon pheromones to communicate to other males that they are unsuitable as prospective mates [29]. We recently showed that suppression of male-male courtship depends upon ETH signaling in antennal lobe interneurons and that JH levels and ETH-JH signaling do not impact male-male courtship [30]. Since ETH-deficient males court conspecific males with more than twice the intensity reported from interneuron-specific ETHR-silencing, we manipulated neuronal ETHR expression to determine the extent of such ETH modulation. First, we knocked down ETHR pan-neuronally (Elav-Gal4>UAS-ETHR-RNAi), and observed a significant elevation of post-copulation courtship behavior (Fig 2C). To rule out developmental defects, we performed the same experiment with Tubulin-Gal80ts (Elav-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts) and raised the flies at the restrictive temperature (18°C) until eclosion, followed by a shift to the permissive temperature (29°C) until Day 4, when PCCI was assessed (Fig 2D). Still, courtship after completion of mating was elevated. While ETH-Gal4 expression is largely limited to the epitracheal Inka cells in both sexes (S3A–S3D Fig) [12], a high-fidelity ETHR-Gal4 [31] expresses in cells the brain, including Kenyon cells, peptidergic neurons, and olfactory neurons (Fig 3A–3D) [32]. We compared expression of ETHR-Gal4 in male and female nervous systems, including the sensory periphery (Fig 3). Intriguingly, we found ETHR-Gal4 labels olfactory and gustatory sensory neurons, which are used for mate discrimination (Fig 3B, 3D, 3G–3J) [33]. We identified several notable differences in expression, with female-specific labeling of neurons in the pars intercerebralis (Fig 3A and 3C), male-specific labeling of neurons in the mesothoracic and abdominal neuromeres (Fig 3E and 3F) and the prothoracic tarsi (Fig 3G and 3H). While the antennal lobe was similar in both sexes, we identified neurons innervating VA1lm and DA1 glomeruli, which are postsynaptic targets of olfactory sensory neurons that express OR47B and OR67D, respectively (Fig 3B and 3D) [34]. These sensory neuron subsets are FruM-positive olfactory neurons that convey pheromone information to the brain to tune male courtship behavior [35,36]. GR32A-expressing gustatory neurons also sense pheromones [37], and ETHR- and GR32A-driven fluorophore expression (ETHR-Gal4;UAS-mCD8-GFP>GR32A-lexA;AOPmCherry) appears to overlap in cells in the labellum, but not in the tarsi (S4A and S4B Fig).

Fig 3. Sexually dimorphic expression pattern of ETHR-Gal4 in male and female nervous systems.

Fig 3

(A-D) Brains of example ETHR- Gal4>UAS-mCD8-GFP male (A-B) and female (C-D)(green is anti-GFP, magenta is anti-bruchpilot, scale bar = 50 μm). Antennal lobes from A and C are enlarged in B (male) and D (female) with ETHR-Gal4-labeled glomeruli demarcated by dashed lines in left panel (DA1/OR67D-white, VA1l/m/OR47B-yellow, VA6/OR82A-blue, DA4m/OR2A-beige and DC3/OR83C-gray), GFP alone in middle, and merged in right panel (scale bar = 25 μm). Thoracic ganglia of example ETHR-Gal4>UAS-mCD8-GFP male (E) and female (F)(scale bar = 50 μm). (G-J) ETHR-Gal4>UAS-mCD8-GFP expression in the taste-sensing periphery of male (G, I) and female (H, J) prothoracic tarsi (G-H) and labella (I-J) (scale bar = 50 μm). Yellow arrowheads in C (pars intercerebralis), E (mesothoracic ganglion), and G (tarsus) indicate cell bodies of neurons only observed in one sex.

We therefore hypothesized sensory neurons may be a target of ETH and assessed candidate subsets known for sensing male-derived, courtship-inhibiting volatiles GR32A, OR47B and OR67D [3739]. As ETH-deficient males court other males intensely, we assessed the requirement of ETHR expression in each of these classes of neurons for inhibition of male-male courtship (Fig 4A). Males subjected to ETHR knockdown in GR32A neurons, but not in OR47B+ or OR67D+ neurons, significantly increased courtship toward conspecific males, suggesting that ETH directly influences GR32A+ neuron sensitivity.

Fig 4.

Fig 4

(A) Male-male courtship index of males with ETHR knockdown in pheromone sensory neurons OR67D, OR47B, and GR32A with genetic controls (ANOVA, n = 15–25). (B) Extracellular recordings from S6 taste hairs of GR32A-Gal4>UAS-ETHRRNAi1 and control males to 0, 0.5, 1, 2, and 5 mM denatonium for 500 ms after contact (2-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test for multiple comparisons, n = 6–8). (C) Latency to first spike after denatonium exposure for GR32A-Gal4>UAS-ETHRRNAi1 and controls across all concentrations (Pairwise One-way ANOVA). (D) Mean neuronal responses obtained for the first 500 ms from s6 sensilla of the GR32A-Gal4>UAS-ETHR-Sym, UAS-ETHRRNAi1, and GR32A-Gal4>+ males upon stimulation with the indicated concentrations of 7-T. (Each dot represents responses obtained from one individual/taste sensillum. 2-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test for multiple comparisons, n = 6–9). (E) Representative traces obtained for the first 500 ms from s6 sensilla of the GR32A-Gal4>UAS-ETHRRNAi1, UAS-ETHRRNAi1>+, and GR32A-Gal4>+ males upon stimulation with 5 mg/ml 7T (scale bar = 100 ms). ns p > .05; * p < .05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; **** p < .0001.

The overlap in labellar but not tarsal expression of GR32A-LexA and ETHR-Gal4 suggests ETH may target pheromone-sensing neurons in the labellum. GR32A+ neurons in the labellum are activated by 7T as well as a variety of other bitter tastants [40,41]. We tested responses to denatonium in ETHR-knockdown (GR32A-Gal4>ETHR-RNAi) and control males, and found a small, but significant reduction in action potentials with a slightly longer latency to response over a range of concentrations (Fig 4B and 4C, S4C and S4D Fig). Finally, we tested whether GR32A-driven ETHR knockdown impacted spiking after contact with 7T. ETHR knockdown decreased responses to 5 mg/ml 7T, which may explain observed elevation in male-male courtship upon ETHR silencing in GR32A neurons (Fig 4D and 4E). Thus, ETHR knockdown results in diminished sensitivity to ligands in primary sensory neurons, including pheromone.

ETHR silencing in OR67D and GR32A-expressing neurons relieves post-copulatory courtship inhibition (PCCI).

As mentioned above, males “perfume” females with cVA and 7T during mating, which communicate their mated status to future male suitors [27]. These pheromones are sensed by OR67D-olfactory and GR32A-gustatory neurons, respectively, two mutually exclusive sensory neuron populations whose activity inhibits courtship. We investigated whether these pathways are important for inhibition of courtship immediately after mating. To eliminate the GR32A gene in sensory neurons, we used the minos-mediated integration cassette GR32Amimic, which has GFP inserted into the GR32A locus [42], and knocked down GFP with a pan-neuronal driver, 57C10-Gal4 [43]. This technique allows for specific and extremely effective knockdown of tagged genes [44]. We first assessed whether knockdown of GR32A de-repressed male-male courtship as was previously reported [45]. As expected, GR32A knockdown stimulated male-male courtship (Fig 5A). Knockdown also diminished PCCI, arguing the behavior relies upon GR32A and 7T (Fig 5B). We observed high post-copulation courtship in controls, which we attribute to males being heterozygous for native GR32A. OR67D-/- knock-out mutants also had impaired PCCI (Fig 5C). Next, we knocked down ETHR in OR67D, OR47B and GR32A-expressing neurons and found that ETHR-silencing in OR67D and GR32A-expressing subsets relieves PCCI (Fig 5D). These results suggest that ETH signaling modulates pheromone perception to tune male courtship both before and after mating.

Fig 5. Post-copulation courtship inhibition depends upon GR32A, OR67D, ETHR, and Juvenile Hormone.

Fig 5

(A) Quantification of male courtship toward a wt male subject for GR32Amimic mutants and heterozygous genetic controls (ANOVA, n = 20–24). (B) Quantification of male courtship toward a wt female subject after copulation for GR32Amimic mutants and heterozygous genetic controls (ANOVA, n = 18–20). (C) Post-copulation courtship for OR67D-/- males and heterozygous controls (Mann-Whitney U, n = 10–18). (D) Post-copulation courtship index for males with ETHR knockdown in OR67D, OR47B, and GR32A neurons and genetic controls (ANOVA, n = 10–25). (E) Post-copulation Courtship for JHAMT-Gal4>UAS-ETHR-RNAi flies and controls. (F) Pre-copulation and post-copulation courtship for reference wt males, and Inka cell-ablated (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-Reaper) males treated with either acetone alone or acetone with the Juvenile Hormone Analog, methoprene (n = 10–12). (E) Model for the role of ETH in modulation of courtship. In normal conditions (Left), Inka cells (green) release ETH (black arrows), stimulating the CA to produce JH (Red, Red arrow) for subsequent inhibition of P1 circuitry, and promote activity in aversive pheromone (wavy lines) sensing neurons in the antennae (OR67D+) and labellum (GR32A+). This results in low courtship (wings at side). When ETH is low (indicated by black dashed arrows), the CA and aversive pheromone-sensing neurons are less active, resulting in lower JH (dashed red arrows) and insensitivity to aversive pheromones (red x’s), thus stimulating courtship and unilateral wing extensions (wing extended outward). ns p>0.05; ** p < .01; *** p < 0.001; **** p < .0001.

Juvenile hormone regulates post-copulation courtship

While reduced ligand sensitivity can account for elevated male courtship toward males and mated females, ETH-injected flies reduce courtship toward virgin females (Fig 1C), which do not have significant levels of cVA or 7T. ETH-deficient males have low JH levels [12,46], and JH inhibits the activity of dopaminergic, pCd, and NPF neurons upstream of P1 courtship command neurons, thus preventing courtship [47]. We therefore sought to determine if JH plays a role in the disinhibition of post-copulation courtship observed in ETH-deficient males. We knocked down the ETH receptor (ETHR) specifically in the CA, which reduces total JH levels (JHAMT-Gal4<UAS-ETHR-RNAi) [12]. We observed a significant elevation in post-copulation courtship, suggesting JH may also play a role in post-copulation courtship (Fig 5E). Accordingly, we tested whether treatment with the JH analog, methoprene, could restore normal post-mating refractoriness (Fig 5F). Methoprene treated, ETH-deficient males significantly decreased courtship after mating, but courtship after mating was still elevated compared to controls (Fig 5F). Thus, JH appears to be critical for post-copulation courtship inhibition, but insufficient to completely account for elevated post-copulation courtship in ETH-deficient males. We therefore propose that ETH inhibits courtship indirectly by promoting JH synthesis and directly by setting sensitivity to courtship-inhibitory pheromones to normal levels (Fig 5G).

Discussion

We show here that the peptide hormone ETH is necessary for courtship discrimination and post-copulation courtship inhibition. ETH-deficient flies show elevated courtship intensity toward same and opposite sex conspecifics and, strikingly, ETH-deficient males do not terminate courtship overtures toward females after successful copulation. Furthermore, we found that ETH-deficient males are impaired in pheromone sensing or processing, and injection of ETH attenuates courtship intensity toward females. signaling in GR32A-expressing neurons is necessary for normal responses to ligands and prevents courtship toward other males. Post-copulation courtship is inhibited by OR67D, and ETHR-silencing in OR67D and GR32A-expressing neurons relieves post-copulation courtship inhibition. Silencing ETHR in the CA also stimulates post-copulation courtship, while treatment of JHA to ETH-deficient males restores a measure of postcopulatory courtship inhibition after mating.

Our findings support a model whereby normal courtship behavior of males depends upon circulating ETH levels in the hemolymph. At low levels of ETH or ETHR expression, males are less responsive to courtship inhibitory pheromones with respect to both primary chemosensory neuron responsiveness and behavior. JH inhibits courtship in early adulthood [47], and ETH levels are tightly linked with JH. It is therefore likely that ETH targets multiple, semi-redundant signaling systems (GR32A, OR67D, CA) to tune courtship levels rapidly in response to stimuli. Indeed, ETH is responsible for regulation of reproduction in response to stress. Ecdysone levels also fluctuate during courtship [48], and directly target OR67D neurons to regulate male courtship [49]. Interestingly, synthesis and release of ETH is tightly regulated by ecdysone, and ETH shares courtship-regulating targets with both upstream ecdysone (OR67D), and downstream JH (OR47B) signals; these three hormones may work together to co-regulate timing of courtship drive, though this requires further investigation.

ETH signaling in primary sensory neurons

ETH modulates a variety of courtship targets and appears to have a major influence over the drive to mate. Our previous report showed ETHR expression in antennal lobe interneurons is important for mate discrimination [30]. Elimination of ETHR in these interneurons causes disinhibition of male-male courtship, possibly through cVA desensitization [50,51]. We show here that knockdown of ETHR in OR67D neurons regulates post-copulation courtship, which is likely to be cVA-dependent. ETHR silencing in either component of the olfactory system disinhibits normal courtship, suggesting specific physiological roles for ETH in male courtship behavior.

ETHR is a Gq-coupled GPCR, stimulating calcium release from intracellular stores upon activation [52]. During the ecdysis sequence, peptidergic ensembles of ETHR neurons mobilize calcium and release peptide signaling molecules that activate centrally patterned behaviors [53]. In this study, excitability of ETHR-expressing chemosensory neurons appears to be modulated by circulating ETH, becoming more or less sensitive to ligands as hormone levels fluctuate, as we observed in GR32A labellar neurons. It is currently unclear over what time frame such hormonal modulation in this context may occur. However, considering previously demonstrated ETH dynamics during ecdysis, the correspondence between ETH release and behavioral outcomes is expected to be a matter of minutes [53,54].

ETH-JH signaling supports post-copulation courtship inhibition

We recently demonstrated that ETH signaling deficiencies decrease whole body juvenile hormone levels in both males and females [12,46]. In this work, we show that ETH deficiency or ETHR knockdown in the CA elevates courtship after mating. JH has been linked to male reproductive maturation, while JH receptors in OR47B neurons promote their receptivity to courtship stimulatory pheromones [11]. A recent report showed that JH suppresses courtship by mature males and inhibits calcium activity in courtship-promoting NPF neurons, doublesex-positive pCd neurons, and dopaminergic neurons [47]. JH levels do not influence male-male courtship [30], and post-copulation courtship does not seem ethologically beneficial at any life stage, arguing that this role for juvenile hormone is independent of homeostasis or development. Timing of circulating JH appears to be a critical for the courtship status quo, with too much or too little disrupting proper courtship behavior. In addition to its modulation of perception, JH targets Kenyon cells to mature and enhance memory [46,55], and drastically reduced JH levels could prevent flies from forming or accessing a “memory” of a recent, successful mating. Paired with sensory deficit, this may account for relief of post-copulation refractoriness observed here.

Conclusion

We have established a relationship between ETH and courtship, wherein ETH maintains responsiveness in several courtship-inhibiting cellular targets (GR32A-expressing gustatory neurons, OR67D-expressing olfactory neurons and the CA). How endogenous ETH levels may change and, in turn, manipulate male courtship awaits future study. A drop in ETH levels in response to stress would by extension elevate courtship toward conspecifics; though in many other species stress has an inhibitory effect on male libido [5658].

We find the influence of ETH and JH in post-copulation courtship particularly intriguing, as the post-mating change in behavioral state has received less attention than pre-mating courtship. ETH appears to modulate courtship by targeting multiple levels of courtship circuitry, both by modulating sensory input to the P1 neurons (OR67D and GR32A) but also the motivation-driving proximal input to the P1 circuit through JH. Further investigation is needed to determine how the CRN circuit, which attenuates activity of P1 neurons to induce mating satiety, integrates hormonal changes. After mating, Drosophila females receive sex peptide, which is released slowly from sperm tails causing infradian elevation of JH [5961], allowing females to accelerate oogenesis and replenish egg stores. The male must also replace accessory gland proteins after mating, which depend upon JH for their synthesis [62]. As males lack circulating sex peptide, this introduces the intriguing possibility that flies employ ETH, an innate allatotropin, to raise JH levels after copulation and inhibit post-copulation courtship. Indeed, in the closely-related male Caribbean fruit fly Anastrepha suspensa, JH levels increase after mating [63].

We have demonstrated here that courtship behavior is critically dependent upon ETH signaling, and suggest multiple targets for this dependency. Our findings raise further questions regarding how the now well-established neural circuitry underlying male courtship integrates endocrine state, particularly after mating.

Materials and methods

Fly strains

Flies used for immunohistochemistry were raised at 22°C on standard cornmeal-agar media under a 12:12 hr light:dark regimen. All flies used for behavior experiments were backcrossed for at least five generations into the Canton-S background. Inka cell-ablated flies were raised at the Gal80ts permissive temperature (18°C). When dark pupae appeared, male pupae were isolated and put in 96-well plates with food until eclosion to maintain naivety. Following eclosion, they were moved to culture tubes within a few hours and heated to the nonpermissive temperature (29°C) for 24 hours, then moved to 22°C until day 4. Inka cell-blocked flies were raised at 18°C until eclosion and similarly isolated, but instead transferred to 29°C until day 4. For both sets, cold controls were isolated similarly, but tubes were maintained in 18°C until courtship assessment. All other genotypes were isolated in the same fashion but maintained at room temperature. Use of double-stranded RNA constructs for silencing of ETHR (UAS-ETHR-Sym (ETHRRNAi1); UAS-ETHR-IR2 line (ETHRRNAi2,VDRC transformant ID dna697) were described previously [64]. ETHR-Gal4 was obtained from Benjamin White (National Institute of Mental Health, Silver Spring). JHAMT-Gal4 was obtained from Brigitte Dauwalder [18]. The OR67D-Gal4 knock-in was obtained from Anandasankar Ray [39]. The remaining fly lines were obtained from the Bloomington Stock Center (Indiana University, Bloomington, IN): ETH-Gal4 (BL51982), Tubulin-Gal80ts (BL7017), UAS-Reaper (BL5824), UAS-Shibirets (BL44222), Canton-S (referred to as Wt, BL64349), Elav-Gal4 (BL8765), UAS-GFP (BL5137), OR47B-Gal4 (BL9983), GR32A-Gal4 (BL57622), UAS-EcR-RNAi (BL37059) GR32A-mimic (BL37451),UAS-GFP-dsRNA (BL44415), and 57C10-Gal4 (BL39171).

Courtship assays

For all behavior experiments, males were isolated prior to eclosion in culture tubes with food. Naive day 4 adult male flies were placed in a 1 cm diameter courtship chamber with same-aged wild type Canton-S male or virgin female subject and observed. All courtship scoring was performed single-blind.

Male-Male Courtship: To assess male-male courtship, 4-day-old test males were placed in 1 cm courtship chambers with virgin Canton-S males and time performing stereotypical courtship behaviors (Orientation, licking, tapping, chasing and wing extension) was totaled during a 10 minute window after a gate bisecting the chamber and separating the males was removed. Seconds engaging in courtship behaviors over the 600 second total was converted to a percentage termed courtship index (CI).

Male-Female Courtship: For male-female courtship, 4-day-old males were placed into 1 cm courtship chambers with Canton-S virgin females and recorded until 10 minutes after the final male from the last mating pair in the 14-chamber apparatus dismounted. For pairs that did mate, courtship index (see above) during the time to copulation was tabulated when relevant. The time where the male mounted the female to the time of dismount was recorded in all cases and reported where relevant. At the moment of dismount, recently-mated males were scored for courtship behaviors during the following 10 minutes, and courtship index was reported as with males, but labeled post-copulation courtship index to distinguish it in this context. For pre-copulation/post-copulation comparisons, courtship index (tabulated as a percentage of time performing stereotypical courtship behaviors as a percentage of total time) during the five minutes (or fewer if males mated earlier) before mating was compared to only the first five minutes after males and females broke copulation. Time between mounting and dismounting was recorded as copulation duration.

Mate-and-switch: Inka cell-ablated (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-Reaper) and Canton-S males isolated as before at eclosion were isolated until day 4, and simultaneously placed in three identical courtship chambers with Canton-S virgin females simultaneously. An experimenter watched the chambers, and immediately after completion, aspirated the male and female out and moved the recently-mated male subject and female partner to a courtship chamber, either empty or containing a counterpart from a desired pair which had completed mating just prior to the transport pair. The new pair were on either side of a gate, and when the 14-well chamber was full of desired partners, the video recording began and gates were retracted. As 3 times as many pairs were being mated as were needed in the final chamber, the entire loading sequence was completed within 3 minutes after the first male dismounted. Conceptual schematic is displayed in Fig 2A.

Immunohistochemistry

Brain and Sensory Organ Staining: We crossed ETH-Gal4 and ETHR-Gal4 transgenic flies with UAS-mCD8-GFP flies to produce progeny expressing GFP in Gal4-expressing cells for immunohistochemical staining. UAS-mCD8-GFP;ETHR-Gal4>LexAOP-mCherry;GR32A-LexA were stained for both GFP and RFP. Day 4 adult brains, proboscises, or tarsi were dissected in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) and fixed in 2% paraformaldehyde (Electron Microscopy Sciences Cat# 15713) in PBS for 25 minutes. After washing with PBS-0.2% Triton X-100 (PBST) five times and blocking in 2% normal goat serum (Sigma Cat# G9023) in PBST for 30 minutes at room temperature, tissue samples were incubated with primary antibody; mouse anti-NC82 (DSHB Cat# nc82; RRID:AB_2314866, 1:20) rabbit anti-GFP antiserum (Invitrogen Cat# A10260, 1:1000 dilution), or mouse anti-dsRed (Takara Bio Cat# 632392 1:500 dilution) in PBST for overnight at room temperature. Tissues were washed with PBST five times, and incubated in PBST+2% NGS with secondary; Alexa Fluor 488-labeled goat anti-rabbit IgG (Invitrogen Cat# A27034, 1:500), Alexa Fluor 568-labeled Goat anti-mouse (Biotium, Cat# 20100, 1:500)in room temperature overnight, and washed 4 times for 10 minutes each in PBST before mounting with Aqua Polymount (Polysciences 18606–20) and imaging. Immunofluorescence was recorded using a confocal microscope (Leica model SP5) with FITC filter in the Institute of Integrative Genome Biology core facility at UC Riverside and processed using the Leica Application Suite X (leica-microsystems.com) or FIJI Imagej (https://fiji.sc).

Reproductive Tract Staining: After mating to desired genotype males, Canton-S females were flash frozen in liquid nitrogen 2 hrs after mating as in Chen et al., 2022 [65]. Reproductive tracts were removed and fixed 25 minutes in 2% paraformaldehyde, followed by four 10 minute washes in PBST. Tracts were then placed in vectashield mounting medium with DAPI (H-1200) and set overnight, plated and imaged with a Zeiss u880 microscope at either 10X or 40X. Processing was done using FIJI ImageJ (https://fiji.sc).

Extracellular tip recordings

Extracellular tip-recordings from labellar taste bristles were performed as previously described [66]. All tastants were dissolved in 30 mM tricholine citrate (Sigma, T0252), which functioned as the electrolyte [67]. Recordings were obtained from male flies aged 4–5 days at 25 C. Neuronal responses were amplified and digitized using IDAC-4 data acquisition software. Visualization and manual-quantification of action potential spikes were done with autospike software (Syntech). Number of action potential spikes generated in the first 500 ms following contact artifact was used to quantify neuronal responses.

For recordings with 7-tricosene, solutions were prepared by adding appropriate amounts of 7-tricosene to TCC solutions so as to attain a final TCC concentration of 30 mM right before the day’s experiments. Solutions were kept on ice and vortexed right before filling the recording electrodes. Recording electrodes were filled with 7-tricosene solutions by injecting the solutions into them. Electrodes for 7-tricosene application were used only once.

Injections

Males were injected with saline, 5 pmol ETH (synthesized by Research Genetics), or faux injected (needle penetration without injection of vehicle) using a previously described procedure [12]. In short, males were cold anesthetized and injected abdominally at ZT 16:15 with 0 (faux), 50 nl of saline, or 50 nl of 100μM ETH using a Drummond Nanoject II. After 45 minutes, each group was placed with a virgin female and scored for courtship during a 10 minute interval.

Methoprene treatment

Methoprene treatment was performed as previously described [12]. Within 4 hours of eclosion, adult males of indicated genotype were chilled on ice in their culture tubes until still and then quickly moved to a cold plate set to 2°C under a dissecting microscope. Using a Nanoject II (Drummond) fit with a blunted capillary males were treated topically on the dorsal side of the abdomen with 50 nl of either ethanol (mutant rescues) or acetone (Inka cell ablation rescues) alone (Fisher MFCD00008765), or 0.01% methoprene (Cayman Chemicals 16807) dissolved in acetone or ethanol (~500 nM). Ethanol was used for mutant testing because acetone treatment slightly increased background courtship, whereas ethanol did not. The entire procedure was completed within 20 minutes, after which flies were returned to their housing.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. ETH-deficient males exhibit increased courtship after copulation.

(A-D) Cold controls for male-male (A, C) and male-female (B, D) courtship indices (time spent courting over 600s) toward a wt counterpart for Inka cell-ablated (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-Reaper, A-B), Inka cell secretion-blocked (ETH-Gal4>UAS-Shits, C-D), and genetic controls kept in 18°C after eclosion (ANOVA, n = 15–20). (E-F) Post-mating courtship index (time spent courting over total time starting at dismounting, 600s) toward a wt female for Inka cell-ablated and genetic control males (E, ANOVA, n = 30) and males with EcR knocked down in Inka cells and genetic controls (F, ANOVA, n = 10–20). ns p>0.05; *** p < 0.001; **** p < .0001.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. ETH-deficient males exhibit increased copulation length.

(A-C) DAPI-stained female reproductive tracts (Left, scale bar = 250 μm) from wild-type females, flash frozen 2 hours after mating to ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts/+ (A), UAS-Reaper/+ (B), or ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts/UAS-Reaper (C). Rod-like sperm heads are visible in the spermathecae (right, indicated by yellow arrowheads, scale bar = 25 μm). (D-E) Copulation duration (seconds from mounting to dismount) for Inka cell-ablated (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-Reaper)(A, ANOVA, n = 30–40) and Inka cell-blocked (ETH-Gal4>UAS-Shits)(B, ANOVA, n = 15–20). ns p>0.05; ** p < .01; *** p < 0.001.

(TIF)

S3 Fig. Expression pattern of ETH-Gal4 in adult nervous system.

(A-B) Example confocal images of brains (A-B) and thoracic ganglia (C-D) from male (A, C) and female (B, D) flies of genotype UAS-mCD8>ETH-Gal4 (anti-GFP is green, anti-bruchpilot is magenta, scale bars = 50 μm).

(TIF)

S4 Fig. Male expression pattern of ETHR-Gal4 in taste organs.

(A-B) UAS-GFP;ETHR-Gal4>AOP-mCherry;GR32A-LexA overlapping expression in labella (A, blue arrowheads) non-overlapping expression in tarsi (B, black arrowheads). (C) Mean spike response from extracellular recordings of S6 taste sensilla of GR32A-Gal4>UAS-ETHRRNAi1 and control males to 10 mM denatonium for 500 ms after contact (One-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test for multiple comparison, n = 6–8). (D) Spikes/500ms for each 500ms interval between 0 and 10 seconds after contact with 0.5 mM denatonium for GR32A-Gal4>UAS-ETHR-RNAi and genetic controls (One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test for multiple comparisons, n = 6–7, color-matched asterisks indicate groups statistically distinct from test flies).

(TIF)

Acknowledgments

We thank Roscoe Huo, Michael Chitgian, Lola Alade, Michelle Gyulnazaryan and Raymond Tan-Tran for scoring courtship videos, Nilay Yapici, Sangsoo Lee, and Yuta Mabuchi for comments on the manuscript, Benjamin White and Naoki Yamanaka for fly strains; Anandasankar Ray for fly lines and helpful advice; and the Bloomington Stock Center (NIH P40OD018537) for reagents. We thank Craig Montell and Nilay Yapici for permitting A.G. and M.M. to complete revision experiments in their respective labs.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files. Further information and requests for resources and reagents should be directed to and will be fulfilled by the corresponding authors, Matthew Meiselman (matthew.meiselman@UNLV.edu), and Michael E. Adams (adams@ucr.edu). This study did not generate new unique reagents. All reagents used in the study are available upon request.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) GM-067310 (to MEA), the UCR Agricultural Experiment Station, The UCR Office of Research, and the UCR Graduate Division. Facilities provided by the UCR Institute for Integrated Genome Biology were instrumental to the success of this study. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Chapman T, Liddle LF, Kalb JM, Wolfner MF, Partridge L. Cost of mating in Drosophila melanogaster females is mediated by male accessory gland products. Nature. 1995;373(6511):241–4. Epub 1995/01/19. doi: 10.1038/373241a0 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Markow TA, Quaid M, Kerr S. Male Mating Experience and Competitive Courtship Success in Drosophila-Melanogaster. Nature. 1978;276(5690):821–2. doi: 10.1038/276821a0 WOS:A1978GA88900048. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Zhang SX, Rogulja D, Crickmore MA. Recurrent Circuitry Sustains Drosophila Courtship Drive While Priming Itself for Satiety. Curr Biol. 2019;29(19):3216–28 e9. Epub 2019/09/03. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2019.08.015 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6783369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ejima A, Smith BPC, Lucas C, Van Naters WV, Miller CJ, Carlson JR, et al. Generalization of courtship learning in Drosophila is mediated by cis-vaccenyl acetate. Current Biology. 2007;17(7):599–605. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2007.01.053 WOS:000245572200020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Demir E, Dickson BJ. fruitless splicing specifies male courtship behavior in Drosophila. Cell. 2005;121(5):785–94. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2005.04.027 WOS:000229658000016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Kimura K, Hachiya T, Koganezawa M, Tazawa T, Yamamoto D. Fruitless and Doublesex Coordinate to Generate Male-Specific Neurons that Can Initiate Courtship (vol 59, pg 759, 2008). Neuron. 2008;60(2):390–1. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.10.005 WOS:000260549300020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Pan YF, Meissner GW, Baker BS. Joint control of Drosophila male courtship behavior by motion cues and activation of male-specific P1 neurons. P Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109(25):10065–70. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1207107109 WOS:000306061400080. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Clowney EJ, Iguchi S, Bussell JJ, Scheer E, Ruta V. Multimodal Chemosensory Circuits Controlling Male Courtship in Drosophila. Neuron. 2015;87(5):1036–49. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.07.025 WOS:000361146300014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ribeiro IMA, Drews M, Bahl A, Machacek C, Borst A, Dickson BJ. Visual Projection Neurons Mediating Directed Courtship in Drosophila. Cell. 2018;174(3):607–+. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.06.020 WOS:000439870500011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Wu SF, Guo C, Zhao H, Sun MS, Chen J, Han CH, et al. Drosulfakinin signaling in fruitless circuitry antagonizes P1 neurons to regulate sexual arousal in Drosophila. Nature Communications. 2019;10. ARTN 4770 10.1038/s41467-019-12758-6. WOS:000490982100010. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-12758-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lin HH, Cao DS, Sethi S, Zeng Z, Chin JSR, Chakraborty TS, et al. Hormonal Modulation of Pheromone Detection Enhances Male Courtship Success. Neuron. 2016;90(6):1272–85. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2016.05.004 WOS:000378527600015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Meiselman M, Lee SS, Tran RT, Dai H, Ding Y, Rivera-Perez C, et al. Endocrine network essential for reproductive success in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(19):E3849–E58. Epub 2017/04/26. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1620760114 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5441734. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Meiselman MR, Kingan TG, Adams ME. Stress-induced reproductive arrest in Drosophila occurs through ETH deficiency-mediated suppression of oogenesis and ovulation. BMC Biol. 2018;16(1):18. Epub 2018/02/01. doi: 10.1186/s12915-018-0484-9 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5791332. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Antony C, Jallon JM. The Chemical Basis for Sex Recognition in Drosophila-Melanogaster. Journal of Insect Physiology. 1982;28(10):873–80. doi: 10.1016/0022-1910(82)90101-9 WOS:A1982PK10600011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Jallon JM. A Few Chemical Words Exchanged by Drosophila during Courtship and Mating. Behav Genet. 1984;14(5):441–78. doi: 10.1007/BF01065444 WOS:A1984AAA0300004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Everaerts C, Farine JP, Cobb M, Ferveur JF. Drosophila cuticular hydrocarbons revisited: mating status alters cuticular profiles. PLoS One. 2010;5(3):e9607. Epub 2010/03/17. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009607 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2834761. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Oram TB, Card GM. Context-dependent control of behavior in Drosophila. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2022;73:102523. Epub 2022/03/15. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2022.02.003 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Wijesekera TP, Saurabh S, Dauwalder B. Juvenile Hormone Is Required in Adult Males for Drosophila Courtship. Plos One. 2016;11(3). ARTN e0151912 10.1371/journal.pone.0151912. WOS:000372697400055. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151912 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Areiza M, Nouzova M, Rivera-Perez C, Noriega FG. Ecdysis triggering hormone ensures proper timing of juvenile hormone biosynthesis in pharate adult mosquitoes. Insect Biochem Molec. 2014;54:98–105. doi: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2014.09.006 WOS:000344440500011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Shi Y, Liu TY, Jiang HB, Liu XQ, Dou W, Park Y, et al. The Ecdysis Triggering Hormone System, via ETH/ETHR-B, Is Essential for Successful Reproduction of a Major Pest Insect, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel). Frontiers in Physiology. 2019;10. ARTN 151 10.3389/fphys.2019.00151. WOS:000461730100001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.White K, Tahaoglu E, Steller H. Cell killing by the Drosophila gene reaper. Science. 1996;271(5250):805–7. doi: 10.1126/science.271.5250.805 WOS:A1996TU69400045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Gonzalez-Bellido PT, Wardill TJ, Kostyleva R, Meinertzhagen IA, Juusola M. Overexpressing Temperature-Sensitive Dynamin Decelerates Phototransduction and Bundles Microtubules in Drosophila Photoreceptors. Journal of Neuroscience. 2009;29(45):14199–210. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2873-09.2009 WOS:000271664000015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Cho KH, Daubnerova I, Park Y, Zitnan D, Adams ME. Secretory competence in a gateway endocrine cell conferred by the nuclear receptor betaFTZ-F1 enables stage-specific ecdysone responses throughout development in Drosophila. Dev Biol. 2014;385(2):253–62. Epub 2013/11/20. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2013.11.003 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3900412. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Zhang SX, Rogulja D, Crickmore MA. Dopaminergic Circuitry Underlying Mating Drive. Neuron. 2016;91(1):168–81. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2016.05.020 WOS:000382394300020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Gillott C. Male accessory gland secretions: Modulators of female reproductive physiology and behavior. Annual Review of Entomology. 2003;48:163–84. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.48.091801.112657 WOS:000180709200009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Vandermeer RK, Obin MS, Zawistowski S, Sheehan KB, Richmond RC. A Reevaluation of the Role of Cis-Vaccenyl Acetate, Cis-Vaccenol and Esterase-6 in the Regulation of Mated Female Sexual Attractiveness in Drosophila-Melanogaster. Journal of Insect Physiology. 1986;32(8):681–6. doi: 10.1016/0022-1910(86)90109-5 WOS:A1986D787900003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Laturney M, Billeter JC. Drosophila melanogaster females restore their attractiveness after mating by removing male anti-aphrodisiac pheromones. Nature Communications. 2016;7. ARTN 12322 10.1038/ncomms12322. WOS:000380858600001. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12322 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Bontonou G, Wicker-Thomas C. Sexual Communication in the Drosophila Genus. Insects. 2014;5(2):439–58. Epub 2014/01/01. doi: 10.3390/insects5020439 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4592592. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Rings A, Goodwin SF. To court or not to court—a multimodal sensory decision in Drosophila males. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2019;35:48–53. doi: 10.1016/j.cois.2019.06.009 WOS:000490898000009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Deshpande SA, Meiselman M, Hice RH, Arensburger P, Rivera-Perez C, Kim DH, et al. Ecdysis triggering hormone receptors regulate male courtship behavior via antennal lobe interneurons in Drosophila. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 2019;278:79–88. Epub 2018/12/14. doi: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2018.12.003 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Diao FQ, Ironfield H, Luan HJ, Diao FC, Shropshire WC, Ewer J, et al. Plug-and-Play Genetic Access to Drosophila Cell Types using Exchangeable Exon Cassettes. Cell Rep. 2015;10(8):1410–21. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.01.059 WOS:000350564200017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Lee SS, Adams ME. Regulation of Drosophila Long-Term Courtship Memory by Ecdysis Triggering Hormone. Front Neurosci-Switz. 2021;15. ARTN 670322 10.3389/fnins.2021.670322. WOS:000647480900001. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.670322 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kohl J, Huoviala P, Jefferis GS. Pheromone processing in Drosophila. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2015;34:149–57. Epub 2015/07/06. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2015.06.009 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6027988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Fishilevich E, Vosshall LB. Genetic and functional subdivision of the Drosophila antennal lobe. Current Biology. 2005;15(17):1548–53. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2005.07.066 WOS:000231865700024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Stockinger P, Kvitsiani D, Rotkopf S, Tirian L, Dickson BJ. Neural circuitry that governs Drosophila male courtship behavior. Cell. 2005;121(5):795–807. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2005.04.026 WOS:000229658000017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Manoli DS, Foss M, Villella A, Taylor BJ, Hall JC, Baker BS. Male-specific fruitless specifies the neural substrates of Drosophila courtship behaviour. Nature. 2005;436(7049):395–400. doi: 10.1038/nature03859 WOS:000230623400043. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Wang L, Han X, Mehren J, Hiroi M, Billeter JC, Miyamoto T, et al. Hierarchical chemosensory regulation of male-male social interactions in Drosophila. Nat Neurosci. 2011;14(6):757–62. Epub 2011/04/26. doi: 10.1038/nn.2800 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3102769. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.van Naters WVG, Carlson JR. Receptors and neurons for fly odors in Drosophila. Current Biology. 2007;17(7):606–12. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2007.02.043 WOS:000245572200021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Kurtovic A, Widmer A, Dickson BJ. A single class of olfactory neurons mediates behavioural responses to a Drosophila sex pheromone. Nature. 2007;446(7135):542–6. doi: 10.1038/nature05672 WOS:000245242900050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Lacaille F, Hiroi M, Twele R, Inoshita T, Umemoto D, Maniere G, et al. An Inhibitory Sex Pheromone Tastes Bitter for Drosophila Males. Plos One. 2007;2(8). ARTN e661 10.1371/journal.pone.0000661. WOS:000207455200001. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000661 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Moon SJ, Lee Y, Jiao Y, Montell C. A Drosophila Gustatory Receptor Essential for Aversive Taste and Inhibiting Male-to-Male Courtship. Current Biology. 2009;19(19):1623–7. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.07.061 WOS:000271085400024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Nagarkar-Jaiswal S, Lee PT, Campbell ME, Chen K, Anguiano-Zarate S, Gutierrez MC, et al. A library of MiMICs allows tagging of genes and reversible, spatial and temporal knockdown of proteins in Drosophila. Elife. 2015;4. Epub 2015/04/01. doi: 10.7554/eLife.05338 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4379497. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Pfeiffer BD, Jenett A, Hammonds AS, Ngo TT, Misra S, Murphy C, et al. Tools for neuroanatomy and neurogenetics in Drosophila. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(28):9715–20. Epub 2008/07/16. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0803697105 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2447866. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Neumuller RA, Wirtz-Peitz F, Lee S, Kwon Y, Buckner M, Hoskins RA, et al. Stringent analysis of gene function and protein-protein interactions using fluorescently tagged genes. Genetics. 2012;190(3):931–40. Epub 2011/12/17. doi: 10.1534/genetics.111.136465 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3296255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Miyamoto T, Amrein H. Suppression of male courtship by a Drosophila pheromone receptor. Nat Neurosci. 2008;11(8):874–6. Epub 2008/07/22. doi: 10.1038/nn.2161 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5655991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Lee SS, Ding YK, Karapetians N, Rivera-Perez C, Noriega FG, Adams ME. Hormonal Signaling Cascade during an Early-Adult Critical Period Required for Courtship Memory Retention in Drosophila. Current Biology. 2017;27(18):2798–+. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.08.017 WOS:000411581800026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Zhang SX, Glantz EH, Miner LE, Rogulja D, Crickmore MA. Hormonal control of motivational circuitry orchestrates the transition to sexuality in Drosophila. Sci Adv. 2021;7(25). ARTN eabg6926 10.1126/sciadv.abg6926. WOS:000664958400005. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abg6926 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Ishimoto H, Sakai T, Kitamoto T. Ecdysone signaling regulates the formation of long-term courtship memory in adult Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(15):6381–6. Epub 2009/04/04. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0810213106 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2669368. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Chen SL, Liu BT, Lee WP, Liao SB, Deng YB, Wu CL, et al. WAKE-mediated modulation of cVA perception via a hierarchical neuro-endocrine axis in Drosophila male-male courtship behaviour. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):2518. Epub 2022/05/07. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-30165-2 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9076693. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Liu WW, Liang XH, Gong JX, Yang Z, Zhang YH, Zhang JX, et al. Social regulation of aggression by pheromonal activation of Or65a olfactory neurons in Drosophila. Nature Neuroscience. 2011;14(7):896–U119. doi: 10.1038/nn.2836 WOS:000292081700018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Liang L, Li YL, Potter CJ, Yizhar O, Deisseroth K, Tsien RW, et al. GABAergic Projection Neurons Route Selective Olfactory Inputs to Specific Higher-Order Neurons. Neuron. 2013;79(5):917–31. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.06.014 WOS:000330269100010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Iversen A, Cazzamali G, Williamson M, Hauser F, Grimmelikhuijzen CJ. Molecular identification of the first insect ecdysis triggering hormone receptors. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2002;299(5):924–31. Epub 2002/12/10. doi: 10.1016/s0006-291x(02)02798-5 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kim YJ, Zitnan D, Galizia CG, Cho KH, Adams ME. A command chemical triggers an innate behavior by sequential activation of multiple peptidergic ensembles. Current Biology. 2006;16(14):1395–407. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2006.06.027 WOS:000239324700020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Park Y, Kim YJ, Dupriez V, Adams ME. Two subtypes of ecdysis-triggering hormone receptor in Drosophila melanogaster. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2003;278(20):17710–5. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M301119200 WOS:000182838300017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Leinwand SG, Scott K. Juvenile hormone drives the maturation of spontaneous mushroom body neural activity and learned behavior. Neuron. 2021;109(11):1836–+. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2021.04.006 WOS:000657374800011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Chenoweth PJ. Libido and Mating-Behavior in Bulls, Boars and Rams—a Review. Theriogenology. 1981;16(2):155–77. doi: 10.1016/0093-691x(81)90098-4 WOS:A1981MF37200003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Lenzi A, Lombardo F, Salacone P, Gandini L, Jannini EA. Stress, sexual dysfunctions, and male infertility. J Endocrinol Invest. 2003;26(3 Suppl):72–6. Epub 2003/07/02. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Marai IFM, Habeeb AAM, Gad AE. Rabbits’ productive, reproductive and physiological performance traits as affected by heat stress: a review. Livest Prod Sci. 2002;78(2):71–90. Pii S0301-6226(02)00091-X doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00091-X WOS:000179597400001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Liu HF, Kubli E. Sex-peptide is the molecular basis of the sperm effect in Drosophila melanogaster. P Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100(17):9929–33. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1631700100 WOS:000184926000056. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Moshitzky P, Fleischmann I, Chaimov N, Saudan P, Klauser S, Kubli E, et al. Sex-peptide activates juvenile hormone biosynthesis in the Drosophila melanogaster corpus allatum. Arch Insect Biochem. 1996;32(3–4):363–74. doi: WOS:A1996UZ51700009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Sugime Y, Watanabe D, Yasuno Y, Shinada T, Miura T, Tanaka NK. Upregulation of Juvenile Hormone Titers in Female Drosophila melanogaster Through Mating Experiences and Host Food Occupied by Eggs and Larvae. Zool Sci. 2017;34(1):52–7. doi: 10.2108/zs160150 WOS:000395121300008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Yamamoto K, Chadarevian A, Pellegrini M. Juvenile-Hormone Action Mediated in Male Accessory-Glands of Drosophila by Calcium and Kinase-C. Science. 1988;239(4842):916–9. doi: 10.1126/science.3124270 WOS:A1988M118300034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Teal PEA, Gomez-Simuta Y, Proveaux AT. Mating experience and juvenile hormone enhance sexual signaling and mating in male Caribbean fruit flies. P Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97(7):3708–12. doi: 10.1073/pnas.97.7.3708 WOS:000086195200133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Kim D-H, Han M-R, Lee G, Lee SS, Kim Y-J, Adams ME. Rescheduling Behavioral Subunits of a Fixed Action Pattern by Genetic Manipulation of Peptidergic Signaling. PLOS Genet. 2015;11(9): e1005513. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1005513 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Chen DS, Clark AG, Wolfner MF. Octopaminergic/tyraminergic Tdc2 neurons regulate biased sperm usage in female Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics. 2022. Epub 2022/06/24. doi: 10.1093/genetics/iyac096 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Benton R, Dahanukar A. Electrophysiological recording from Drosophila taste sensilla. Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2011;2011(7):839–50. Epub 2011/07/05. doi: 10.1101/pdb.prot5631 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Wieczorek H, Wolff G. The Labellar Sugar Receptor of Drosophila. J Comp Physiol A. 1989;164(6):825–34. doi: 10.1007/Bf00616754 WOS:A1989T875800011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Gregory P Copenhaver, Lynn M Riddiford

31 Mar 2022

Dear Dr Meiselman,

Thank you very much for submitting your Research Article entitled 'Endocrine Modulation of Primary Chemosensory Neurons Regulates  Drosophila Courtship Behavior' to PLOS Genetics.

The manuscript was fully evaluated at the editorial level and by independent peer reviewers. The reviewers appreciated the attention to an important problem, but raised some substantial concerns about the current manuscript. Based on the reviews, we will not be able to accept this version of the manuscript, but we would be willing to review a much-revised version. We cannot, of course, promise publication at that time.

Should you decide to revise the manuscript for further consideration here, your revisions should address the specific points made by each reviewer. We will also require a detailed list of your responses to the review comments and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript.

If you decide to revise the manuscript for further consideration at PLOS Genetics, please aim to resubmit within the next 60 days, unless it will take extra time to address the concerns of the reviewers, in which case we would appreciate an expected resubmission date by email to plosgenetics@plos.org.

If present, accompanying reviewer attachments are included with this email; please notify the journal office if any appear to be missing. They will also be available for download from the link below. You can use this link to log into the system when you are ready to submit a revised version, having first consulted our Submission Checklist.

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

Please be aware that our data availability policy requires that all numerical data underlying graphs or summary statistics are included with the submission, and you will need to provide this upon resubmission if not already present. In addition, we do not permit the inclusion of phrases such as "data not shown" or "unpublished results" in manuscripts. All points should be backed up by data provided with the submission.

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool.  PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

PLOS has incorporated Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate, into its journal-wide submission system in order to screen submitted content for originality before publication. Each PLOS journal undertakes screening on a proportion of submitted articles. You will be contacted if needed following the screening process.

To resubmit, use the link below and 'Revise Submission' in the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder.

[LINK]

We are sorry that we cannot be more positive about your manuscript at this stage. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any concerns or questions.

Yours sincerely,

Lynn M Riddiford

Associate Editor

PLOS Genetics

Gregory P. Copenhaver

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Genetics

Your interesting paper requires some revisions before publication as outlined by the 3 reviewers. It is also important that you clearly distinguish between Gr32A and Gr33A receptors, what is known about their roles in both taste and courtship behaviors, and why you chose to use the Gr33A null mutant in Figure 4A, but in most of your studies use Gr32A-expressing neurons. Your present explanation in the paper has not been sufficient as two of the reviewers seem to be confused.

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Authors:

Please note here if the review is uploaded as an attachment.

Reviewer #1: The manuscript submitted by Meiselman et al is an important addition to the field of Drosophila courtship and endocrinology. The authors carefully characterize the role of the peptide hormone, ETH, in regulating male courtship behavior. Using the Gal4/UAS system to deplete ETH release or ETH receptor activity in certain sensory neurons, the authors link ETH activity to the regulation of male-male courtship and post-copulation courtship toward females. The authors also provide evidence that ETH regulates male courtship indirectly via Juvenile Hormone release from the corpora allata. The authors submit an interesting model whereby ETH influences male courtship through multiple pathways. I recommend this work for publication in PLOS Genetics with the minor revisions enumerated below.

- line 55: cues

- line 68–69: sentence clarification: As it reads, it's not clear if the authors mean that the JH analog rescues the ETH or JH deficiency. Pls specify.

- line 76: What's an "allatotropin"? Pls define it in the text for readers less familiar with insect endocrinology.

- line 78: Readers unfamiliar with the genetic tools that target Inka cells will be curious to know how "clean" the ETH-Gal4 is. Pls clarify. How specific is the ETH-Gal4 to Inka cells in the adult? E.g., can the authors at least rule out CNS expression? In lieu of doing IHC, perhaps the ETH-Gal4 was carefully characterized in another paper; the authors could reference that paper and provide a clear statement about the specificity of the Gal4. I would recommend the same for all Gal4 drivers used in behavioral experiments of the paper. Ideally, the authors would provide adult CNS images for all drivers used in the paper.

- line 86: An ETH rescue experiment would strengthen this section a lot. I recommend that the authors attempt to rescue the phenotype of ETH deficient males by injecting ETH.

- line 92: Do the authors mean Fig. 1F? Also, the authors may consider combining this paragraph with the previous one, as it appears to be a continuation of the remarks re Fig. 1F-G.

- line 118: What is "ETHR-trojan-Gal4" and how exactly does it differ form "ETHR-Gal4" written below? Pls clarify and define in the text.

- line 119: From my understanding of the sentence, the authors are saying that the ETH-trojan-Gal4 labels interneurons that innervate the noted glomeruli, and are post-synpatic to the noted sensory neurons. They claim that these interneurons are also fru positive. Do the authors provide any evidence for that? Pls clarify or provide the data.

- line 121: In Fig. 3A, I recommend including an illustration of a fly brain with the region shown in 3A boxed. At first blush, it's unclear what part of the brain we're looking at in 3A.

- line 135: The authors often say "ETHR-silenced" when referrning to RNAi-mediated depletion. To be more accurate and clear, I recommend "ETHR-depleted" or "ETHR-knockdown".

- line 147: Why did the authors chose to test Gr32A function with a Gr33A mutant? To my knowledge, loss-of-function alleles of Gr32A are available. It would make more sense to use Gr32A mutants. Alternatively, perhaps the authors could use an RNAi against Gr32A.

- line 151: It is indeed surprising that knockdown of ETHR in Gr32A-expressing neurons produced a PCCI phenotype, whereas loss of Gr33A (which should affect the function of Gr32A-expressing neurons) had no apparent effect. Can the authors speculate why this may have happened? Perhaps use of a Gr32A mutant would give different results.

- line 162: The authors should mention was "CA" is.

- line 166–168: This sentence is confusing. The authors write, "restored the normal postmating decline of courtship," but then go onto to say that JH is "insufficient to completely account for elevated post-copulation courtship in ETH-deficient males." As I see it (and what I think the authors are saying), giving JH to ETH-deficient males partially restored the postmating decline of courtship, which suggests that ETH exerts its effects through JH but also directly upon the sensory system.

Along these lines, the authors should state how much methoprene they gave the males in the legend of Fig 4D. Additionally, it is not obvious how we can rule out the possibility that the partial rescue was due to insufficient amounts of methoprene. What if administering >300 nM better rescued the behavior of the ETH-depleted males, possibly even to full levels?

- line 169: In Fig 4D, I recommend that the authors include a wild-type control so the partial rescue can be more apparent to the reader.

- line 403: missing (D)

Reviewer #2: In this interesting paper the authors describe significant new roles for the Ecdysis-Triggering Hormone (ETH). They observe three aspects of courtship that are affected by reduction of ETH or silencing/ablation of cells that produce ETH:

- Injected ETH reduces male-female courtship.

- Ablation of INKA cells, where ETH is produced, increases male-male courtship.

- Silencing of the same cells abolishes post-copulation courtship inhibition.

These deficiencies can be mapped to reduced ETH action in a subset of sensory neurons, and in one case to lower sensitivity to stimuli.

The most significant and novel of these observations is the effect of reduced ETH action on Post-copulatory Courtship Inhibition (PCCI). Mutant males don’t suppress courtship after successful copulation. Based on their examination where ETHR is present, the authors test the roles of several candidate cells. They find that ETHR is required in Gr32 expressing neurons in the labellum and in OR76D antennal glomeruli.

These are really interesting new aspects of the complex physiological adult role of ETH and demonstrate how multi-faceted the adult roles of endocrine regulators can be. The experiments are carefully crafted and done and support the authors’ interpretations well.

I have a few questions and suggestions:

Figure 1:

1. I am a little surprised that mature control animals would only show a 50% copulation rate. Did the authors optimize their assay (and if so how) for this outcome, which would allow them to actually observe an enhancement of copulation success that might otherwise be hidden by a “ceiling effect”?

Figure 2:

The SWITCH experiment is a nice experiments to address the question whether the defect lies in receiver or sender.

1. Have the authors tested a SWITCH constellation where both the first and the second mate are ETH deficient?

Figure 3:

1. The authors show the expression of ETHR-Trojan-Gal4 in distinct antennal lobe neurons. Figure A is not well suited to identify the relevant glomeruli. Without double staining, or at the very least images of the separate channels, outlining and naming the glomeruli (perhaps including a schematic) this is not clear.

2. I believe it would be a good idea to include the S2 fig images in Figure 3.

3. The authors’ finding that Gr32 neurons with ETHR knockdown have reduced sensitivity is intriguing. However, it is not zero. Does the response increase with prolonged exposure or with higher concentration?

4. Why did the authors use Denatonium in their recordings? Why not 7T?

Figure 4:

1.Why was GR33-/- chosen and not GR32-/-?

2. The fact that Gr33-/- did not show a phenotype, but GR32A-Gal4-UAS-ETHR RNAi has not been discussed

3. I think the role of JH deserves a little deeper discussion to describe its roles in different contexts. It appears to be a hormone that is important to “get it right” for wildtype courtship: Normal male-female courtship (enhance courtship when needed), normal postmating inhibition (suppress courtship when it would be inappropriate), perhaps by enabling correct recognition of pheromonal and other cues.

Additonal comments/questions:

1. The authors have previously shown that lower ETH results in reduced courtship memory, but only mention it in passing in the discussion. Are the mutant males described here capable of forming a courtship memory? I would like to see a deeper discussion how reduced courtship memory might play into the current findings.

2. The authors mention that it is unlikely that the absence of PCCI is caused by reduced mating time, in fact it appears slightly longer. Do the mutant males transfer sperm?

Reviewer #3: In their manuscript “Endocrine Modulation of Primary Chemosensory Neurons Regulates Drosophila Courtship Behavior”, Meiselman et al. study the role of Ecdysis Triggering Hormone (ETH) in modulating courtship motivation. For this they look at postcopulatory courtship inhibition (PCCI), the phenomenon of strongly reduced courtship activity of male Drosophila shortly after a copulation. They find that ETH is required for PCCI and the suppression of male-male courtship. Based on a “mate and switch” experiment, they propose that the effect is due to an internal state change of the male, i.e. reduced male detection of courtship inhibitory cues on recently mated females and other males. The authors show that ETH receptor is required in chemosensory neurons Gr32a positive of the labellum for their full sensitivity and inhibition of male-male courtship. ETH receptor knockdown in Gr32a or Or67d sensory neurons also leads to abolishment of the PCCI effect, suggesting that ETH signaling is required for the function of these neurons in sensing inhibitory courtship cues.

The paper addresses an important topic, the neuronal and genetic basis of motivational control of reproductive behaviors. The results are interesting, but main mechanistic questions remain unanswered. Not all results are presented in a clear way and the manuscript and data could be organized in a better way. The Method part is insufficient, not all important experimental detail is explained. Some of the experiments lack critical controls that would allow for an overall more careful, comprehensive and insightful interpretation.

Major points:

1) Inka cell ablation/secretion block: can the authors exclude that killing of Inka cells has other effects than reduction of ETH levels? Do Inka cells possibly secrete other compounds than ETH? Can they specifically affect ETH synthesis in adult Inka cells and confirm their results? The authors inconsistently use “Inka cell ablated” and “ETH deficient” males for denoting the same experimental animals, which is confusing.

2) In Figure 1, temperature controls for the temperature dependent tub-Gal80ts experiments and the Shits experiments are missing, the data is not thus not conclusive.

3) The authors use two assays to assess courtship inhibition toward inappropriate targets: courtship toward mated females (PCCI) and toward males. I am missing a clear discussion how they think these assays differ. Do the authors think that they are testing the same with the two assays, i.e. response to inhibitory courtship cues cVA and 7-T, but PCCI is a more sensitive readout? In the manuscript, differences/commonalities between the assays is not made clear. Thinking a bit more, it is maybe not “surprisingly” (line 151) that PCCI would required both Gr32A and Or67D neurons, whereas male male courtship inhibition is more robust and still in place when only Gr32a is affected.

Fig3D and Fig4A,B belong, in my opinion together and could maybe presented in one figure, also in a more consistent way? For example, why are 2 RNAi lines only used for PCCI, and why is Or47b-Gal4 only tested for male male courtship?

4) Inconsistency of presenting PCCI data in Fig1F and Fig4D versus Fig4A-C. Why is the pre-copulation data not shown in Fig4A-C? Presentation as paired data seems more conclusive to me.

5) Fig 2: When is ETH signaling required in the sensory neurons, during development or in the adult? Does manipulation of ETH signaling for example change sensory neuron survival, wiring/morphology? There are many ways to restrict RNAi knockdown of ETH receptor temporally and by this explore the mechanism of changed response to inhibitory cues.

6) The finding that ETHR knockdown alters the response profile of taste hairs is very interesting. It is however not entirely clear why this is demonstrated with denatonium when the relevant candidate substance is 7-T or extract from male cuticular hydrocarbons. Tests with actual inhibitory courtship cues would be more compelling here. Also, what are the datapoints in Fig3E and 3G representing: tested hairs, animals, repeated stimulus presentations?

7) The last section of the results, line 155 following (Juvenile Hormone regulates post-copulation courtship) is the least clear part of the manuscript. The authors perform methoprene treatment of Inka cell ablated males and find that this partially restores PCCI. However, it is not apparent how JH or its analog methoprene exerts this effect and if sensory neurons are involved. To make the mechanistic link with their previous findings, test their model presented in Figure 4E and disambiguate central motivation circuits from sensory neuron function effects, it would be good to test methoprene treatment in Gr32a and Or67d mutants and flies with ETHR knockdown in sensory neurons.

Minor points:

1) Abstract :«and critical for mate choice and courtship inhibition after the completion of copulation”- the formulation “critical for mate choice after completion of copulation” is a bit confusing/misleading. The term “postcopulatory mate choice” is often used in regards to female decisions about usage of received sperm and control of fertilization. I assume the authors mean the male has a lower courtship motivation right after one copulation and then “chooses” not to mate a second time right afterwards. Since they study courtship motivation rather than “mate choice” sensu stricto, I suggest changing wording here.

2) Line 55: “queues”> cues??

3) Line 140: “ETHR Silencing” > confusing terminology- the receptor is not “silenced”, but its translation diminished by RNAi or it is absent in the mutants.

4) Figure 3A: red green color scheme is inconsiderate for color blind.

5) Line 205: Reference 37 should be rather cited after the following sentence.

**********

Have all data underlying the figures and results presented in the manuscript been provided?

Large-scale datasets should be made available via a public repository as described in the PLOS Genetics data availability policy, and numerical data that underlies graphs or summary statistics should be provided in spreadsheet form as supporting information.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No: No data file has been added yet.

Reviewer #3: No: see review, major point 4

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Decision Letter 1

Gregory P Copenhaver, Lynn M Riddiford

27 Jul 2022

Dear Dr Meiselman,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript entitled "Endocrine Modulation of Primary Chemosensory Neurons Regulates Drosophila Courtship Behavior" has been editorially accepted for publication in PLOS Genetics. Congratulations!

Before your submission can be formally accepted and sent to production you will need to complete our formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. Please be aware that it may take several days for you to receive this email; during this time no action is required by you. Please note: the accept date on your published article will reflect the date of this provisional acceptance, but your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until the required changes have been made.

Once your paper is formally accepted, an uncorrected proof of your manuscript will be published online ahead of the final version, unless you’ve already opted out via the online submission form. If, for any reason, you do not want an earlier version of your manuscript published online or are unsure if you have already indicated as such, please let the journal staff know immediately at plosgenetics@plos.org.

In the meantime, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgenetics/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information to ensure an efficient production and billing process. Note that PLOS requires an ORCID iD for all corresponding authors. Therefore, please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field.  This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager.

If you have a press-related query, or would like to know about making your underlying data available (as you will be aware, this is required for publication), please see the end of this email. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming article at this point, to enable them to help maximise its impact. Inform journal staff as soon as possible if you are preparing a press release for your article and need a publication date.

Thank you again for supporting open-access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Genetics!

Yours sincerely,

Lynn M Riddiford

Academic Editor

PLOS Genetics

Gregory P. Copenhaver

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Genetics

www.plosgenetics.org

Twitter: @PLOSGenetics

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

Comments from the reviewers (if applicable):

This revised version is much improved over the original version as you have answered most of the reviewers' comments and criticisms. This paper will make a significant addition to the role of ETH in adult insect reproductive behavior and should be of general interest to all interested in reproductive behavior and how it is coordinated by hormones. When preparing the final version, please make sure that all the references are in the correct format. I notice that the titles of the papers are some times in sentence case as they should be but sometimes have every major word capitalized. Also, genus and species names should be italicized in these titles.

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

Data Deposition

If you have submitted a Research Article or Front Matter that has associated data that are not suitable for deposition in a subject-specific public repository (such as GenBank or ArrayExpress), one way to make that data available is to deposit it in the Dryad Digital Repository. As you may recall, we ask all authors to agree to make data available; this is one way to achieve that. A full list of recommended repositories can be found on our website.

The following link will take you to the Dryad record for your article, so you won't have to re‐enter its bibliographic information, and can upload your files directly: 

http://datadryad.org/submit?journalID=pgenetics&manu=PGENETICS-D-22-00285R1

More information about depositing data in Dryad is available at http://www.datadryad.org/depositing. If you experience any difficulties in submitting your data, please contact help@datadryad.org for support.

Additionally, please be aware that our data availability policy requires that all numerical data underlying display items are included with the submission, and you will need to provide this before we can formally accept your manuscript, if not already present.

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

Press Queries

If you or your institution will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, or if you need to know your paper's publication date for media purposes, please inform the journal staff as soon as possible so that your submission can be scheduled accordingly. Your manuscript will remain under a strict press embargo until the publication date and time. This means an early version of your manuscript will not be published ahead of your final version. PLOS Genetics may also choose to issue a press release for your article. If there's anything the journal should know or you'd like more information, please get in touch via plosgenetics@plos.org.

Acceptance letter

Gregory P Copenhaver, Lynn M Riddiford

18 Aug 2022

PGENETICS-D-22-00285R1

Endocrine Modulation of Primary Chemosensory Neurons Regulates Drosophila Courtship Behavior

Dear Dr Meiselman,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript entitled "Endocrine Modulation of Primary Chemosensory Neurons Regulates Drosophila Courtship Behavior" has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Genetics! Your manuscript is now with our production department and you will be notified of the publication date in due course.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, unless you have opted out or your manuscript is a front-matter piece, the early version of your manuscript will be published online. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

Thank you again for supporting PLOS Genetics and open-access publishing. We are looking forward to publishing your work!

With kind regards,

Zita Barta

PLOS Genetics

On behalf of:

The PLOS Genetics Team

Carlyle House, Carlyle Road, Cambridge CB4 3DN | United Kingdom

plosgenetics@plos.org | +44 (0) 1223-442823

plosgenetics.org | Twitter: @PLOSGenetics

Associated Data

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

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. ETH-deficient males exhibit increased courtship after copulation.

    (A-D) Cold controls for male-male (A, C) and male-female (B, D) courtship indices (time spent courting over 600s) toward a wt counterpart for Inka cell-ablated (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-Reaper, A-B), Inka cell secretion-blocked (ETH-Gal4>UAS-Shits, C-D), and genetic controls kept in 18°C after eclosion (ANOVA, n = 15–20). (E-F) Post-mating courtship index (time spent courting over total time starting at dismounting, 600s) toward a wt female for Inka cell-ablated and genetic control males (E, ANOVA, n = 30) and males with EcR knocked down in Inka cells and genetic controls (F, ANOVA, n = 10–20). ns p>0.05; *** p < 0.001; **** p < .0001.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. ETH-deficient males exhibit increased copulation length.

    (A-C) DAPI-stained female reproductive tracts (Left, scale bar = 250 μm) from wild-type females, flash frozen 2 hours after mating to ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts/+ (A), UAS-Reaper/+ (B), or ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts/UAS-Reaper (C). Rod-like sperm heads are visible in the spermathecae (right, indicated by yellow arrowheads, scale bar = 25 μm). (D-E) Copulation duration (seconds from mounting to dismount) for Inka cell-ablated (ETH-Gal4;Tubulin-Gal80ts>UAS-Reaper)(A, ANOVA, n = 30–40) and Inka cell-blocked (ETH-Gal4>UAS-Shits)(B, ANOVA, n = 15–20). ns p>0.05; ** p < .01; *** p < 0.001.

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. Expression pattern of ETH-Gal4 in adult nervous system.

    (A-B) Example confocal images of brains (A-B) and thoracic ganglia (C-D) from male (A, C) and female (B, D) flies of genotype UAS-mCD8>ETH-Gal4 (anti-GFP is green, anti-bruchpilot is magenta, scale bars = 50 μm).

    (TIF)

    S4 Fig. Male expression pattern of ETHR-Gal4 in taste organs.

    (A-B) UAS-GFP;ETHR-Gal4>AOP-mCherry;GR32A-LexA overlapping expression in labella (A, blue arrowheads) non-overlapping expression in tarsi (B, black arrowheads). (C) Mean spike response from extracellular recordings of S6 taste sensilla of GR32A-Gal4>UAS-ETHRRNAi1 and control males to 10 mM denatonium for 500 ms after contact (One-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test for multiple comparison, n = 6–8). (D) Spikes/500ms for each 500ms interval between 0 and 10 seconds after contact with 0.5 mM denatonium for GR32A-Gal4>UAS-ETHR-RNAi and genetic controls (One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test for multiple comparisons, n = 6–7, color-matched asterisks indicate groups statistically distinct from test flies).

    (TIF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewer responses.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files. Further information and requests for resources and reagents should be directed to and will be fulfilled by the corresponding authors, Matthew Meiselman (matthew.meiselman@UNLV.edu), and Michael E. Adams (adams@ucr.edu). This study did not generate new unique reagents. All reagents used in the study are available upon request.


    Articles from PLoS Genetics are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES