Evolve and resequence (E&R) is a new approach to investigate the genomic responses to selection during experimental evolution. By using whole genome sequencing of pools of individuals (Pool-Seq), this method can identify selected variants in controlled and replicable experimental settings. Reviewing the current state of the field, we show that E&R can be powerful enough to identify causative genes and possibly even single-nucleotide polymorphisms. We also discuss how the experimental design and the complexity of the trait could result in a large number of false positive candidates. We suggest experimental and analytical strategies to maximize the power of E&R to uncover the genotype–phenotype link and serve as an important research tool for a broad range of evolutionary questions.
Functional preferences in the use of right/left forelimbs are not exclusively present in humans but have been widely documented in a variety of vertebrate and invertebrate species. A matter of debate is whether non-human species exhibit a degree and consistency of functional forelimb asymmetries comparable to human handedness. The comparison is made difficult by the variability in hand use in humans and the few comparable studies conducted on other species. In spite of this, interesting continuities appear in functions such as feeding, object manipulation and communicative gestures. Studies on invertebrates show how widespread forelimb preferences are among animals, and the importance of experience for the development of forelimb asymmetries. Vertebrate species have been extensively investigated to clarify the origins of forelimb functional asymmetries: comparative evidence shows that selective pressures for different functions have likely driven the evolution of human handedness. Evidence of a complex genetic architecture of human handedness is in line with the idea of multiple evolutionary origins of this trait.
From the early stages of life, learning the regularities associated with specific objects is crucial for making sense of experiences. Through filial imprinting, young precocial birds quickly learn the features of their social partners by mere exposure. It is not clear though to what extent chicks can extract abstract patterns of the visual and acoustic stimuli present in the imprinting object, and how they combine them. To investigate this issue, we exposed chicks (Gallus gallus) to three days of visual and acoustic imprinting, using either patterns with two identical items or patterns with two different items, presented visually, acoustically or in both modalities. Next, chicks were given a choice between the familiar and the unfamiliar pattern, present in either the multimodal, visual or acoustic modality. The responses to the novel stimuli were affected by their imprinting experience, and the effect was stronger for chicks imprinted with multimodal patterns than for the other groups. Interestingly, males and females adopted a different strategy, with males more attracted by unfamiliar patterns and females more attracted by familiar patterns. Our data show that chicks can generalize abstract patterns by mere exposure through filial imprinting and that multimodal stimulation is more effective than unimodal stimulation for pattern learning.
Biological predispositions to attend to visual cues, such as those associated with face-like stimuli or with biological motion, guide social behavior from the first moments of life and have been documented in human neonates, infant monkeys and domestic chicks. Impairments of social predispositions have been recently reported in neonates at high familial risk of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Using embryonic exposure to valproic acid (VPA), an anticonvulsant associated to increased risk of developing ASD, we modeled ASD behavioral deficits in domestic chicks. We then assessed their spontaneous social predispositions by comparing approach responses to a stimulus containing a face configuration, a stuffed hen, vs. a scrambled version of it. We found that this social predisposition was abolished in VPA-treated chicks, whereas experience-dependent mechanisms associated with filial imprinting were not affected. Our results suggest a specific effect of VPA on the development of biologically-predisposed social orienting mechanisms, opening new perspectives to investigate the neurobiological mechanisms involved in early ASD symptoms.
Predispositions of newborn vertebrates to preferentially attend to living beings and learn about them are pervasive. Their disturbance (e.g. in neonates at risk for autism), may compromise the proper development of a social brain. The genetic bases of such predispositions are unknown. We use the well-known visual preferences of newly-hatched chicks (Gallus gallus) for the head/neck region of the hen to investigate the presence of segregating variation in the predispositions to approach a stuffed hen vs. a scrambled version of it. We compared the spontaneous preferences of three breeds maintained genetically isolated for at least eighteen years while identically raised. Visually-naïve chicks of all breeds (Padovana, Polverara and Robusta maculata) showed the same initial preference for the predisposed stimulus, suggesting that the direction of the initial preference might be genetically fixed. A few minutes later though, striking differences emerged between breeds, which could indicate different strategies of dealing with affiliative objects: while the Polverara breed maintained a constant preference across the entire test, the Padovana and Robusta breeds progressively explored the alternative stimulus more. We hence documented the presence of inherited genetic variability in the expression of early social predispositions in interaction with environmental stimuli.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.