Contrasting influences of Drosophila white/mini-white on ethanol sensitivity in two different behavioral assays

Background The fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster has been used extensively to investigate genetic mechanisms of ethanol-related behaviors. Many past studies in flies, including studies from our laboratory, have manipulated gene expression using transposons carrying the genetic-phenotypic marker mini-white, a derivative of the endogenous gene white. Whether the mini-white transgenic marker or the endogenous white gene influence behavioral responses to acute ethanol exposure in flies has not been systematically investigated. Methods We manipulated mini-white and white expression via (i) transposons marked with mini-white, (ii) RNAi against mini-white and white and (iii) a null allele of white. We assessed ethanol sensitivity and tolerance using a previously described eRING assay (based on climbing in the presence of ethanol) and an assay based on ethanol-induced sedation. Results In eRING assays, ethanol-induced impairment of climbing correlated inversely with expression of the mini-white marker from a series of transposon insertions. Additionally, flies harboring a null allele of white or flies with RNAi-mediated knockdown of mini-white were significantly more sensitive to ethanol in eRING assays than controls expressing endogenous white or the mini-white marker. In contrast, ethanol sensitivity and rapid tolerance measured in the ethanol sedation assay were not affected by decreased expression of mini-white or endogenous white in flies. Conclusions Ethanol sensitivity measured in the eRING assay is noticeably influenced by white and mini-white, making eRING problematic for studies on ethanol-related behavior in Drosophila using transgenes marked with mini-white. In contrast, the ethanol sedation assay described here is a suitable behavioral paradigm for studies on ethanol sedation and rapid tolerance in Drosophila including those that use widely available transgenes marked with mini-white

Dietary yeast influences ethanol sedation in Drosophila via serotonergic neuron function

Abuse of alcohol is a major clinical problem with far- reaching health consequences. Understanding the environmental and genetic factors that contribute to alcohol- related behaviors is a potential gateway for developing novel therapeutic approaches for patients that abuse the drug. To this end, we have used Drosophila melanogaster as a model to investigate the effect of diet, an environmental factor, on ethanol sedation. Providing flies with diets high in yeast, a routinely used component of fly media, increased their resistance to ethanol sedation. The yeast- induced resistance to ethanol sedation occurred in several different genetic backgrounds, was observed in males and females, was elicited by yeast from different sources, was readily reversible, and was associated with increased nutrient intake as well as decreased internal ethanol levels. Inhibition of serotonergic neuron function using multiple independent genetic manipulations blocked the effect of yeast supplementation on ethanol sedation, nutrient intake, and internal ethanol levels. Our results demonstrate that yeast is a critical dietary component that influences ethanol sedation in flies and that serotonergic signaling is required for the effect of dietary yeast on nutrient intake, ethanol uptake/elimination, and ethanol sedation. Our studies establish the fly as a model for diet- induced changes in ethanol sedation and raise the possibility that serotonin might mediate the effect of diet on alcohol- related behavior in other species.Flies fed a high yeast diet consume more nutrients, have decreased levels of internal ethanol when exposed to ethanol vapor and require longer exposure to ethanol to become sedated (ie, increased ST50). Our studies implicate serotonergic neurons as key regulators of nutrient consumption and therefore, the effect of dietary yeast on ethanol sedation in flies.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155987/1/adb12779.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155987/2/adb12779_am.pd

Genetic studies in Drosophila and humans support a model for the concerted function of CISD2, PPT1 and CLN3 in disease

Wolfram syndrome (WFS) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease characterized by diabetes insipidus, diabetes mellitus, optic atrophy, and deafness. WFS1 and WFS2 are caused by recessive mutations in the genes Wolfram Syndrome 1 (WFS1) and CDGSH iron sulfur domain 2 (CISD2), respectively. To explore the function of CISD2, we performed genetic studies in flies with altered expression of its Drosophila orthologue, cisd2. Surprisingly, flies with strong ubiquitous RNAi-mediated knockdown of cisd2 had no obvious signs of altered life span, stress resistance, locomotor behavior or several other phenotypes. We subsequently found in a targeted genetic screen, however, that altered function of cisd2 modified the effects of overexpressing the fly orthologues of two lysosomal storage disease genes, palmitoyl-protein thioesterase 1 (PPT1 in humans, Ppt1 in flies) and ceroid-lipofuscinosis, neuronal 3 (CLN3 in humans, cln3 in flies), on eye morphology in flies. We also found that cln3 modified the effects of overexpressing Ppt1 in the eye and that overexpression of cln3 interacted with a loss of function mutation in cisd2 to disrupt locomotor ability in flies. Follow-up multi-species bioinformatic analyses suggested that a gene network centered on CISD2, PPT1 and CLN3 might impact disease through altered carbohydrate metabolism, protein folding and endopeptidase activity. Human genetic studies indicated that copy number variants (duplications and deletions) including CLN3, and possibly another gene in the CISD2/PPT1/CLN3 network, are over-represented in individuals with developmental delay. Our studies indicate that cisd2, Ppt1 and cln3 function in concert in flies, suggesting that CISD2, PPT1 and CLN3 might also function coordinately in humans. Further, our studies raise the possibility that WFS2 and some lysosomal storage disorders might be influenced by common mechanisms and that the underlying genes might have previously unappreciated effects on developmental delay