Age- and behaviour-related changes in the expression of biogenic amine receptor genes in the antennae of honey bees (Apis mellifera)

Abstract

We recently identified changes in amine-receptor gene expression in the antennae of the honey bee that correlate with shifts in the behavioural responsiveness of worker bees towards queen mandibular pheromone. Here we examine whether variations in expression of amine-receptor genes are related to age and/or to behavioural state. Colonies with a normal age structure were used to collect bees of different ages, as well as pollen foragers of unknown age. Single- and double-cohort colonies were established also to generate nurses and pollen foragers of the same age. Amdop1 was the only gene examined that showed no significant change in expression levels across the age groups tested. However, expression of this gene was significantly higher in 6-day-old nurses than in pollen foragers of the same age. Levels of expression of Amdop2 were very variable, particularly during the first week of adult life, and showed no correlation with nursing or foraging behaviour. Amdop3 and Amtyr1 expression levels changed dramatically with age. Interestingly, Amtyr1 expression was significantly higher in 15-day-old pollen foragers than in same-age nurses, whereas the opposite was true for Amoa1. While Amoa1 expression in the antennae was lower in 6- and 15-day-old pollen foragers than in nurses of the same age, differences in gene expression levels between nurses and pollen foragers could not be detected in 22-day-old bees. Our data show dynamic modulation of gene expression in the antennae of worker bees and suggest a peripheral role for biogenic amines in regulating behavioural plasticity in the honey bee.

Juvenile Hormone Enhances Aversive Learning Performance in 2-Day Old Worker Honey Bees while Reducing Their Attraction to Queen Mandibular Pheromone

“…We have described age-related changes in the levels of expression of this same gene, and changes also in QMP attraction with age. For example, Amoa1 expression is lower in the antennae of 6-day old workers than in pollen forager bees, and lower also in precocious foragers than in bees of the same age performing tasks within the colony [24]. When bees of foraging age are placed in an arena with a strip impregnated with QMP, unlike 2-day olds they generally avoid contact with the QMP strip [6].…”

Age, worksite location, neuromodulators, and task performance in the ant Pheidole dentata

“…Alekseyenko et al 2014), without being detectable from whole-brain monoamine levels. Neuromodulatory changes can also operate without changes in amine titers through variation in the location and number of receptors, which in social insects has been primarily examined by receptor gene expression (McQuillan et al 2012a, b), although data in P. dentata suggest that receptors do not substantially change with worker age or spatial location (Ibarrarán Viniegra 2015). These internal drivers of behavior may generate variation in response thresholds and interaction rates (Gordon 2010) and/or worksite location, which could together shape individual task performance profiles.…”

The GPCR membrane receptor, DopEcR, mediates the actions of both dopamine and ecdysone to control sex pheromone perception in an insect

“…20-hydroxyecdysone (20E), the major insect steroid hormone, is mainly known to modulate developmental processes, adult physiology and sexual behavior by interacting with a nuclear complex composed of the ecdysone receptor (EcR) and its partner ultraspiracle (USP) and thus eliciting genomic actions (Bigot et al, 2012; Fahrbach et al, 2012; Duportets et al, 2013). On the other hand biogenic amines such as dopamine (DA), octopamine, serotonin or tyramine are well described to orchestrate a broad range of physiological functions when binding with a wide panel of membrane-coupled receptors (Roeder, 2005; Lange, 2009; Duportets et al, 2010; Van Swinderen and Andretic, 2011; McQuillan et al, 2012). However, crosstalk between these different modulators has only been studied in a few invertebrate species so far, particularly with regard to their effects on behavior (Kravitz, 2000; Schulz et al, 2002; Bloch and Meshi, 2007; Gruntenko et al, 2007; Jarriault et al, 2009; Rauschenbach et al, 2012; Geddes et al, 2013).…”