Dietary protein content affects evolution for body size, body fat and viability in
            <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>

Kristensen, Torsten Nygaard; Overgaard, Johannes; Loeschcke, Volker; Mayntz, David

doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.0872

Cited by 43 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Developmental plasticity provides developing individuals with multiple phenotypes each expressed under different nutritional regimes (Xie et al, 2015). This is an adaptive process, which may result in changes manifested at physiological, morphological and behavioural levels (Monaghan, 2008;Kolss et al, 2009;Shingleton et al, 2009;Beldade et al, 2011;Kristensen et al, 2011;Trajković et al, 2013;Güller et al, 2015;Rodrigues et al, 2015). Phenotypic plasticity might allow individuals to "jump" from one fi tness peak to another, without crossing fi tness valleys (Price et al, 2003;Crispo, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Quality and amount of nutritive resources, as well as the balance of macronutrients in food, have a strong effect on the life-history traits of D. melanogaster (Lee et al, 2008;Kolss et al, 2009;Kristensen et al, 2011;Schwarz et al, 2014;May et al, 2015;Rodrigues et al, 2015;Simpson et al, 2015;AbedVieillard & Cortot, 2016). Nutritive demands may change during the course of life and may be sex-specifi c, if the sexes maximize fi tness in different ways (Lee et al, 2008;Maklakov et al, 2008;Lihoreau et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Certain amounts of protein, carbohydrate, lipid, vitamins and minerals are essential for growth and survival of juveniles (Simpson & Raubenheimer, 1993;Simpson et al, 2004). The amount of protein and carbohydrate in the larval food of D. melanogaster affects their developmental time, egg-to-adult survival and lifespan Heilbronn & Ravussin, 2005;Fanson et al, 2009;Andersen et al, 2010;Kristensen et al, 2011;Merkey et al, 2011;Rodrigues et al, 2015;Reis, 2016). However, it is only protein that determines body and tissue growth in larvae (Britton & Edgar, 1998;Colombani et al, 2003).…”

Section: Fly Strains and Substratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In most nutritional studies on D. melanogaster, the quality of the diet is manipulated by altering the concentrations and ratios of yeast and sugar (Kristensen et al, 2011;Matzkin et al, 2011;Fanson et al, 2012;Güller et al, 2015), or by modifying the food by using different species of yeast (Anagnostou et al, 2010), dietary carbohydrates (Lushchak et al, 2014), lipids, vitamins (Reis, 2016) and food additives (Neethu et al, 2014). However, this study involved using diets that are modifi cations of this fl ies' natural food (tomato, banana, carrot and apple), prepared without adding sugar and yeast.…”

Section: Fly Strains and Substratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…investigations (Kristensen et al, 2011;Güler et al, 2015) including fl uctuating asymmetry studies (Vijendravarma et al, 2011), learning and memory (Kolss & Kawecki, 2008;Wright, 2011), cuticular chemistry research (Fedina et al, 2012;Pavković-Lučić et al, 2016) and sexual selection studies (Fricke et al, 2008;Abed-Vieilliard & Cortot, 2016). So far, nutrigenomic studies on D. melanogaster have been used to further our understanding of human nutrigenomics, as metabolism is evolutionarily conserved (Ruden & Lu, 2006), and a promising way of developing strategies for dealing with metabolic diseases (Matzkin et al, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Fitness traits of Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera: Drosophilidae) after long-term laboratory rearing on different diets

Trajković¹,

Vujić²,

Miličić³

et al. 2017

Eur. J. Entomol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Nutrition is one of the most important environmental factors that infl uence the development and growth in Drosophila. The food composition strongly affects their reproduction, welfare and survival, so it is necessary for fl ies to search for a mixture of macronutrients that maximizes their fi tness. We have fi ve D. melanogaster strains, which were reared for 13 years on fi ve different substrates: standard cornmeal-agar-sugar-yeast medium and four substrates modifi ed by adding tomato, banana, carrot and apple. This study was aimed at determining how such long-term rearing of fl ies on substrates with different protein content affects fi tness traits (dynamics of eclosion, developmental time and egg-to-adult survival). Further, we determined how transferring fl ies reared on fruit/vegetable substrates to a standard laboratory diet affected their fi tness. Results indicate that strains reared on the diet with the lowest content of protein and the highest C/N ratio had the slowest eclosion and developmental time, and lowest egg-to-adult survival (apple diet). The fl ies reared on the diet with the highest protein content and the lowest C/N ratio had the highest survival (tomato diet). Flies reared on the carrot diet, which is quite similar in protein content and C/N ratio to the standard cornmeal diet, had the fastest development. Transferring fl ies to the standard cornmeal diet accelerate eclosion and developmental time, but did not affect survival.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fly Strains and Substratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fly Strains and Substratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Fitness traits of Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera: Drosophilidae) after long-term laboratory rearing on different diets

Trajković¹,

Vujić²,

Miličić³

et al. 2017

Eur. J. Entomol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The effect of diet and time after bacterial infection on fecundity, resistance, and tolerance in Drosophila melanogaster

Kutzer

Armitage

2016

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mounting and maintaining an effective immune response in the face of infection can be costly. The outcome of infection depends on two host immune strategies: resistance and tolerance. Resistance limits pathogen load, while tolerance reduces the fitness impact of an infection. While resistance strategies are well studied, tolerance has received less attention, but is now considered to play a vital role in host–pathogen interactions in animals. A major challenge in ecoimmunology is to understand how some hosts maintain their fitness when infected while others succumb to infection, as well as how extrinsic, environmental factors, such as diet, affect defense. We tested whether dietary restriction through yeast (protein) limitation affects resistance, tolerance, and fecundity in Drosophila melanogaster. We predicted that protein restriction would reveal costs of infection. Because infectious diseases are not always lethal, we tested resistance and tolerance using two bacteria with low lethality: Escherichia coli and Lactococcus lactis. We then assayed fecundity and characterized bacterial infection pathology in individual flies at two acute phase time points after infection. As expected, our four fecundity measures all showed a negative effect of a low‐protein diet, but contrary to predictions, diet did not affect resistance to either bacteria species. We found evidence for diet‐induced and time‐dependent variation in host tolerance to E. coli, but not to L. lactis. Furthermore, the two bacteria species exhibited remarkably different infection profiles, and persisted within the flies for at least 7 days postinfection. Our results show that acute phase infections do not necessarily lead to fecundity costs despite high bacterial loads. The influence of intrinsic variables such as genotype are the prevailing factors that have been studied in relation to variation in host tolerance, but here we show that extrinsic factors should also be considered for their role in influencing tolerance strategies.

show abstract

Compound‐specific isotope analysis of amino acids as a new tool to uncover trophic chains in soil food webs

Pollierer

Larsen

Potapov

et al. 2019

Ecological Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food webs in soil differ fundamentally from those aboveground; they are based on inputs from both living plants via root exudates, and from detritus, which is a complex mixture of fungi, bacteria, and dead plant remains. Trophic relationships are difficult to disentangle due to the cryptic lifestyle of soil animals and inevitable microbial contributions to their diet. Compound‐specific isotope analysis of amino acids (AAs) is increasingly used to explore complex food webs. The combined use of AA δ13C and δ15N values is a promising new approach to disentangle trophic relationships since it provides independent but complementary information on basal resources, as well as the trophic position of consumers. We conducted a controlled feeding study in which we reconstructed trophic chains from main basal resources (bacteria, fungi, plants) to primary consumers (springtails, oribatid mites) and predators (gamasid mites, spiders). We analyzed dual compound‐specific isotope AA values of both resources and consumers. By applying an approach termed “stable isotope (13C) fingerprinting” we identified basal resources, and concomitantly calculated trophic positions using 15N values of trophic and source AAs in consumers. In the 13C fingerprinting analysis, consumers in general grouped close to their basal resources. However, higher than usual offsets in AA δ13C between diet and consumers suggest either gut microbial supplementation or the utilization of specific resource fractions. Identification of trophic position crucially depends on correct estimates of the trophic discrimination factor (TDFGlu‐Phe), which was close to the commonly applied value of 7.6‰ in primary consumers feeding on microbial resources, but considerably lower in arachnid predators (~2.4‰), presumably due to higher diet quality, excretion of guanine, and fluid feeding. While our feeding study demonstrates that dual compound‐specific AA analyses hold great promise in delineating trophic linkages among soil‐dwelling consumers and their resources, it also highlights that a “one‐size‐fits‐all” approach to TDFGlu‐Phe does not apply to soil food webs.

show abstract

Dietary protein content affects evolution for body size, body fat and viability in Drosophila melanogaster

Cited by 43 publications

References 20 publications

Fitness traits of Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera: Drosophilidae) after long-term laboratory rearing on different diets

Fitness traits of Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera: Drosophilidae) after long-term laboratory rearing on different diets

The effect of diet and time after bacterial infection on fecundity, resistance, and tolerance in Drosophila melanogaster

Compound‐specific isotope analysis of amino acids as a new tool to uncover trophic chains in soil food webs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About