2014
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095495
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamics of Social Behavior in Fruit Fly Larvae

Abstract: We quantified the extent and dynamics of social interactions among fruit fly larvae over time. Both a wild-type laboratory population and a recently-caught strain of larvae spontaneously formed social foraging groups. Levels of aggregation initially increased during larval development and then declined with the wandering stage before pupation. We show that larvae aggregated more on hard than soft food, and more at sites where we had previously broken the surface of the food. Groups of larvae initiated burrowin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
50
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
(46 reference statements)
5
50
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In nature, nutritional decisions can be complicated by several additional factors such as social information provided by other females (Battesti et al, 2012;Durisko et al, 2014;Lihoreau et al, 2016;Sarin and Dukas, 2009;Chabaud et al, 2009), competition (Eggert et al, 2008;Salomon et al, 2008), sexual interactions with males (Chapman and Partridge, 1996;Gorter et al, 2016) or the presence of beneficial microbial communities on foods (Venu et al, 2014;Wong et al, 2015). Thanks to their unique association with food as shelter, breeding sites and sources of nutrients, fruit flies hold considerable promise as model organisms with which to study these multi-level nutritional interactions within the extended integrative framework of nutritional ecology (Simpson et al, 2015a).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In nature, nutritional decisions can be complicated by several additional factors such as social information provided by other females (Battesti et al, 2012;Durisko et al, 2014;Lihoreau et al, 2016;Sarin and Dukas, 2009;Chabaud et al, 2009), competition (Eggert et al, 2008;Salomon et al, 2008), sexual interactions with males (Chapman and Partridge, 1996;Gorter et al, 2016) or the presence of beneficial microbial communities on foods (Venu et al, 2014;Wong et al, 2015). Thanks to their unique association with food as shelter, breeding sites and sources of nutrients, fruit flies hold considerable promise as model organisms with which to study these multi-level nutritional interactions within the extended integrative framework of nutritional ecology (Simpson et al, 2015a).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This aggregation can be modulated by the distribution of environmental resources, genetic determinants that determine the degree of resource exploitation versus exploration/ foraging (Sokolowski, 2010), and social mechanisms. For example, adult males lay pheromones that attract females to food sources (Lin et al, 2015), and larvae deposit aggregation pheromones (Mast et al, 2014) that may be used to facilitate food digestion (Durisko et al, 2014) and create opportunities for cannibalistic interactions (Vijendravarma et al, 2013).…”
Section: Group Behavior In Drosophila Melanogastermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Softer substrates permit more ovipositional activity with lesser effort since Drosophila have a tendency to puncture substrates to implant their eggs. [53][54][55] In addition, all of the through-holes (d ÂŒ 0.5 mm diameter) in the soft substrate had less than four eggs per hole due to the small spatial constraints.…”
Section: Effect Of Substrate Stiffness On Oviposition Site Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%