Fruit fly research may reveal what happens in female brains during courtship and mating

What are the complex processes in the brain involved with choosing a mate, and are these processes different in females versus males? It’s difficult to study such questions in people, but researchers are finding clues in fruit flies that might be relevant to humans and other animals. Three different studies on the topic are being published in the Cell Press journals Neuron (1, 2) and Current Biology.

Work over the past 100 years has largely focused on the overt courtship behaviors that male flies direct toward females. However, the female ultimately decides whether to reject the male or copulate with him. How does the female make this decision? In one Neuron paper, researchers report that they have identified two small groups of neurons in the female brain that function to modulate whether she will mate or not with a male based on his distinct pheromones and courtship song. In this paper, a team led by Dr. Bruce Baker of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Janelia Farm Research Campus in Virginia also reports that these neurons are genetically distinct from the previously identified neurons that function to drive the elaborate courtship ritual with which a male woos a female. “An understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying how sensory information elicits appropriate sexual behaviors can be used as a point of comparison for how similar sexual behavior circuits are structured and function in other species,” says Dr. Baker.

In the Current Biology study, Dr. Leslie Vosshall of The Rockefeller University in New York City and her team found that a small group of neurons in the abdominal nerve cord and reproductive tract—called Abdominal-B neurons—is necessary for the female to pause her movement and interact with a courting male. When the neurons are inactivated, the female ignores the male and keeps moving, but when the neurons are activated, the female spontaneously pauses. “Sexual courtship is a duet—the male and female send signals back and forth until they reach the point that copulation proceeds,” says Dr. Jennifer Bussell, the lead author of the study. “Pausing to interact with a male, rather than avoiding him, is a crucial step in any female’s behavior leading to copulation. Tying a group of neurons to this particular response to males will allow us to dissect in detail how female mating circuitry functions.”

In another Neuron paper, researchers studied the effects of a small protein called sex peptide that is transferred along with sperm from males to females and is detected by sensory neurons in the uterus. Sex peptide changes the female’s behavior so that she is reluctant to mate again for about10 days. The investigators traced the neuronal pathway that is modulated when the uterus’s sensory neurons detect sex peptide. “Thanks to our work, we think the sex peptide signal goes to a region of the fly’s brain that is the homolog of the hypothalamus, which has been know for many years to be central in controlling sexual receptivity in vertebrates,” explains co-lead author Dr. Mark Palfreyman of the Research Institute of Molecular Pathology in Vienna, Austria. This region of the brain links the nervous system to the endocrine, or hormonal, system. “Of course, these models will still need to be tested and our work only provides an initial glimpse, but our study opens the possibility that analogous neuroendocrine systems control sexual receptivity from flies to vertebrates,” adds senior author Dr. Barry Dickson, who was also a co-author on the Current Biology paper published by Dr. Vosshall.

Pain curbs sex drive in female mice, but not in males

Now, researchers from McGill University and Concordia University in Montreal have investigated, possibly for the first time in any species, the direct impact of pain on sexual behaviour in mice. Their study, published in the April 23 issue of The Journal of Neuroscience, found that pain from inflammation greatly reduced sexual motivation in female mice in heat — but had no such effect on male mice.

“We know from other studies that women’s sexual desire is far more dependent on context than men’s – but whether this is due to biological or social/cultural factors, such as upbringing and media influence, isn’t known,” says Jeffrey Mogil, a psychology professor at McGill and corresponding author of the new study. “Our finding that female mice, too, show pain-inhibited sexual desire suggests there may be an evolutionary biology explanation for these effects in humans – and not simply a sociocultural one.”

To conduct the study, the researchers placed mice in a mating chamber divided by a barrier with openings too small for male mice to squeeze through. This enabled the females to decide whether, and for how long, to spend time with a male partner. Female mice in pain spent less time on the “male side” of the testing chamber, and as a result less sexual behaviour occurred. The researchers found that the sexual motivation of the female mice could be revived, however with a pain-relieving drug (pregabalin) or with either of two known desire-enhancing drugs.

Male mice, for their part, were tested in an undivided chamber in which they had free access to a female partner in heat. Their sexual behaviour was entirely unaffected by the same inflammatory pain. There were no differences in pain perception between the sexes, the researchers determined.

“Chronic pain is very often accompanied by sexual problems in humans,” says Prof. Yitzchak Binik, a professor of psychology at McGill and Director of the Sex and Couple Therapy Service at the McGill University Health Center. “This research provides an animal model of pain-inhibited sexual desire that will help scientists study this important symptom of chronic pain.”

Melissa Farmer, now a postdoctoral fellow at Northwestern University, led the study as a doctoral student at McGill under the supervision of Prof. Mogil, a pain researcher, and Prof. Binik, a human sexual-disorder researcher.

Prof. James Pfaus of Concordia University’s Centre for Studies in Behavioral Neurobiology, an expert on rodent sexual behaviour, also co-authored the study. “The sex differences in pain reactivity open new doors to understanding how sexual responses are organized in the brain,” Prof. Pfaus said. “In fact, the growing trend towards personalized medicine requires us to understand how particular ailments, along with their treatments, might impact the sexual lives of women and men.“

Researchers Discover the Seat of Sex and Violence in the Brain

As reported in a paper published online today in the journal Nature, Caltech biologist David J. Anderson and his colleagues have genetically identified neurons that control aggressive behavior in the mouse hypothalamus, a structure that lies deep in the brain (orange circle in the image). Researchers have long known that innate social behaviors like mating and aggression are closely related, but the specific neurons in the brain that control these behaviors had not been identified until now.

The interdisciplinary team of graduate students and postdocs, led by Caltech senior research fellow Hyosang Lee, found that if these neurons are strongly activated by pulses of light, using a method called optogenetics, a male mouse will attack another male or even a female. However, weaker activation of the same neurons will trigger sniffing and mounting: mating behaviors. In fact, the researchers could switch the behavior of a single animal from mounting to attack by gradually increasing the strength of neuronal stimulation during a social encounter (inhibiting the neurons, in contrast, stops these behaviors dead in their tracks).

These results suggest that the level of activity within the population of neurons may control the decision between mating and fighting.  

The neurons initially were identified because they express a protein receptor for the hormone estrogen, reinforcing the view that estrogen plays an important role in the control of male aggression, contrary to popular opinion. Because the human brain contains a hypothalamus that is structurally similar to that in the mouse, these results may be relevant to human behavior as well.

Study Connects Sleep Deficits Among Young Fruitflies to Disruption in Mating Later in Life

Mom always said you need your sleep, and it turns out, she was right. According to a new study published in Science this week from researchers at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, lack of sleep in young fruit flies profoundly diminishes their ability to do one thing they do really, really well – make more flies.

The study, led by Amita Sehgal PhD, professor of Neuroscience and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) Investigator, links sleep disruption in newborn fruit flies with a critical adult behavior: courtship and mating.

The team, addressed sleep in the very youngest of flies. “These flies sleep considerably more than adults and that behavior repeats across the animal kingdom,” Sehgal says. “Infant humans, rats, and flies, they all sleep a lot.”

Co-author Matthew Kayser, MD, PhD, in the Department of Psychiatry and Center for Sleep and Circadian Neurobiology, whose research centers on the link between sleep disruption and human neuropsychiatric diseases, used the fly – which is far more genetically pliant than mammals — to ask two basic questions: Why do young animals sleep so much? And, what is the implication of altering those patterns?

The team used genetically manipulated flies to show that young flies normally produce relatively little dopamine – a wake-promoting neurotransmitter — in certain neural circuits that feed into the sleep-promoting brain region called the dorsal fan-shaped body (dFSB). Premature activation of those circuits profoundly inhibits the dFSB, reducing sleep.

That answers the first question, Sehgal explains: Young flies make less dopamine, which keeps the dFSB active and sleep levels high. These animals sleep more than adults and are harder to rouse from sleep.

Some clues to the second question – what is the consequence of sleep loss – came from Kayser’s finding that increased dopamine in young flies not only causes sleep loss, but also affects their ability to court when they’re older. “The flies spend less time courting, and those that do usually don’t make it all the way to the end,” Sehgal says.

To address whether sleep loss in young flies affects development of courtship circuits, the team investigated a group of neurons implicated in courtship. One particular subset of those neurons, localized in a specific brain region called VA1v, was smaller in sleep-deprived animals than normal flies, suggesting a possible mechanism for how sleep deprivation can lead to altered courting behavior.

That sleep-deprived flies have altered behavior is not itself a novel finding, Sehgal notes. Earlier studies from her lab and others used mechanical disruption to alter sleep patterns, but in the current study, Sehgal’s team was able to drill down to the specific neural network that is affected. “We identified the circuit that is less active in young flies. If you activate that circuit, you disrupt courtship by impairing the development of a different, courtship-relevant circuit.”

The question now is how these findings relate to human behavior – Kayser’s original question. Though no direct lines can be drawn, the study “does provide the first mechanistic link between sleep in early life and adult behavior,” says Sehgal.

Monogamy’s Boost to Human Evolution

“Monogamy is a problem,” said Dieter Lukas of the University of Cambridge in a telephone news conference this week. As Dr. Lukas explained to reporters, he and other biologists consider monogamy an evolutionary puzzle.

In 9 percent of all mammal species, males and females will share a common territory for more than one breeding season, and in some cases bond for life. This is a problem — a scientific one — because male mammals could theoretically have more offspring by giving up on monogamy and mating with lots of females.

In a new study, Dr. Lukas and his colleague Tim Clutton-Brock suggest that monogamy evolves when females spread out, making it hard for a male to travel around and fend off competing males.

On the same day, Kit Opie of University College London and his colleagues published a similar study on primates, which are especially monogamous — males and females bond in over a quarter of primate species. The London scientists came to a different conclusion: that the threat of infanticide leads males to stick with only one female, protecting her from other males.

Even with the scientific problem far from resolved, research like this inevitably turns us into narcissists. It’s all well and good to understand why the gray-handed night monkey became monogamous. But we want to know: What does this say about men and women?

As with all things concerning the human heart, it’s complicated.

“The human mating system is extremely flexible,” Bernard Chapais of the University of Montreal wrote in a recent review in Evolutionary Anthropology. Only 17 percent of human cultures are strictly monogamous. The vast majority of human societies embrace a mix of marriage types, with some people practicing monogamy and others polygamy. (Most people in these cultures are in monogamous marriages, though.)

There are even some societies where a woman may marry several men. And some men and women have secret relationships that last for years while they’re married to other people, a kind of dual monogamy. Same-sex marriages acknowledge commitments that in many cases existed long before they won legal recognition.

Each species faces its own special challenges — the climate where it lives, or the food it depends on, or the predators that stalk it — and certain conditions may favor monogamy despite its drawbacks. One source of clues to the origin of human mating lies in our closest relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos. They live in large groups where the females mate with lots of males when they’re ovulating. Male chimpanzees will fight with each other for the chance to mate, and they’ve evolved to produce extra sperm to increase their chances that they get to father a female’s young.

Our own ancestors split off from the ancestors of chimpanzees about seven million years ago. Fossils may offer us some clues to how our mating systems evolved after that parting of ways. The hormone levels that course through monogamous primates are different from those of other species, possibly because the males aren’t in constant battle for females.

That difference in hormones influences how primates grow in some remarkable ways. For example, the ratio of their finger lengths is different.

In 2011, Emma Nelson of the University of Liverpool and her colleagues looked at the finger bones of ancient hominid fossils. From what they found, they concluded that hominids 4.4 million years ago mated with many females. By about 3.5 million years ago, however, the finger-length ratio indicated that hominids had shifted more toward monogamy.

Our lineage never evolved to be strictly monogamous. But even in polygamous relationships, individual men and women formed long-term bonds — a far cry from the arrangement in chimpanzees.

While the two new studies published last week disagree about the force driving the evolution of monogamy, they do agree on something important. “Once monogamy has evolved, then male care is far more likely,” Dr. Opie said.

Once a monogamous primate father starts to stick around, he has the opportunity to raise the odds that his offspring will survive. He can carry them, groom their fur and protect them from attacks.

In our own lineage, however, fathers went further. They had evolved the ability to hunt and scavenge meat, and they were supplying some of that food to their children. “They may have gone beyond what is normal for monogamous primates,” said Dr. Opie.

The extra supply of protein and calories that human children started to receive is widely considered a watershed moment in our evolution. It could explain why we have brains far bigger than other mammals.

Brains are hungry organs, demanding 20 times more calories than a similar piece of muscle. Only with a steady supply of energy-rich meat, Dr. Okie suggests, were we able to evolve big brains — and all the mental capacities that come with it.

Because of monogamy, Dr. Opie said, “This could be how humans were able to push through a ceiling in terms of brain size.”

Gene switches make prairie voles fall in love

Epigenetic changes affect neurotransmitters that lead to pair-bond formation.

Love really does change your brain — at least, if you’re a prairie vole. Researchers have shown for the first time that the act of mating induces permanent chemical modifications in the chromosomes, affecting the expression of genes that regulate sexual and monogamous behaviour. The study is published today in Nature Neuroscience.

Prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) have long been of interest to neuroscientists and endocrinologists who study the social behaviour of animals, in part because this species forms monogamous pair bonds — essentially mating for life. The voles’ pair bonding, sharing of parental roles and egalitarian nest building in couples makes them a good model for understanding the biology of monogamy and mating in humans.

Previous studies have shown that the neurotransmitters oxytocin and vasopressin play a major part in inducing and regulating the formation of the pair bond. Monogamous prairie voles are known to have higher levels of receptors for these neurotransmitters than do voles who have yet to mate; and when otherwise promiscuous montane voles (M. montanus) are dosed with oxytocin and vasopressin, they adopt the monogamous behaviour of their prairie cousins.

Because behaviour seemed to play an active part in changing the neurobiology of the animals, scientists suspected that epigenetic factors were involved. These are chemical modifications to the chromosomes that affect how genes are transcribed or suppressed, as opposed to changes in the gene sequences themselves.

Love potion

To look for clues of epigenetic agents at play in monogamous behaviour, neuroscientist Mohamed Kabbaj and his team at Florida State University in Tallahassee took voles which had been housed together for 6 hours but had not mated. The researchers injected drugs into the voles’ brains near a region called the nucleus accumbens, which is closely associated with the reinforcement of reward and pleasure. The drugs blocked the activity of an enzyme that normally keeps DNA tightly wound up and thus prevents the expression of genes.

The team found that the genes for the vasopressin and oxytocin receptors had been transcribed, and as a result the nucleus accumbens of the animals bore high levels of these receptors. Animals that had been permitted to mate also had high levels of vasopressin and oxytocin receptors, confirming the link between bond formation and gene activity.

“Mating activates this brain area which leads to partner preference — we can induce this same change in the brain with this drug,” Kabbaj explains.

Interestingly, the injection alone cannot induce the partner preference. “The drug by itself won’t do all these molecular changes — you need the context: it’s the drug plus the six hours of cohabitation,” says Kabbaj.

“This is a study I myself wanted to do years ago,” says Thomas Insel, who heads the US National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Maryland. “If mating causes the release of the neuropeptide, how does this kick into a higher gear for the rest of the animal’s life? This study for me really is the first experimental demonstration that the epigenetic change would be necessary for the long-term change in behaviour.”

“This paper really shows that there is an epigenetic mechanism underlying pair bonds — we ourselves have looked for that and not found it,” says Alaine Keebaugh of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, who also studies the neuroscience of prairie voles.

Kabbaj says he hopes that the work could ultimately lead to an enhanced understanding of how epigenetic factors affect social behaviour in humans — not only in monogamy and pair bonding, but also in conditions such as autism and schizophrenia, which affect social interactions.

Finding “Mr. Right,” How Insects Sniff Out the Perfect Mate

Unlike humans, most insects rely on their sense of smell when looking for a mate. Scientists have found that sex pheromones play an important role in finding a suitable partner of the same species; yet, little is known about the evolution and genetic basis of these alluring smells.

A team of researchers from Arizona State University and Germany found that one wasp species has evolved a specific scent, or pheromone, which keeps it from mating with other species. In addition, they discovered that the genetic basis of the new scent is simple, which allows the males to change an existing scent into a new one. Over time, the females recognize and use this new scent to distinguish their own species from others.

Scientists from ASU, the University of Regensburg, the Zoological Research Museum Alexander Koenig Bonn, and the Technical University Darmstadt in Germany, present their findings in an article published Feb. 13 online in the journal Nature.

Neurotransmitters Linked to Mating Behavior Are Shared by Mammals and Worms

When it comes to sex, animals of all shapes and sizes tend to behave in predictable ways. There may be a chemical reason for that. New research from Rockefeller University has shown that chemicals in the brain — neuropeptides known as vasopressin and oxytocin — play a role in coordinating mating and reproductive behavior in animals ranging from humans to fish to invertebrates.

"Our research shows that molecules similar to vasopressin and oxytocin have an ancient and evolutionarily conserved role in controlling a critical social behavior, mating," says Cori Bargmann, Torsten N. Wiesel Professor and head of the Lulu and Anthony Wang Laboratory of Neural Circuits and Behavior. "This work suggests that these molecules encode the same kind of information in the brains of very different animals."

Bargmann, whose laboratory studies the relationship between genes, neural circuits and behavior in the C. elegans roundworm, says vasopressin and oxytocin have been implicated in a variety of reproductive and social behaviors in humans and other mammals, including pair bonding, maternal bonding and aggressive and affiliative behaviors. Mice that lack oxytocin may develop social amnesia, and humans who sniff oxytocin through an inhaler change their cooperative behavior in computer games, behaving as though they “trust” other players more.

Finches flirt unwisely if they can only use their left eyes

A patch over a male Gouldian finch’s right eye works like beer goggles, though the bird doesn’t need booze to flirt unwisely. If limited to using his left eye when checking out possible mates, he risks making really stupid choices.

Gouldian finches have caps of black, red or yellow feathers on their heads. In nature, the birds prefer to mate with partners with the same cap color. Yet black-headed males rendered temporarily left-eyed by a tiny removable eye patch flirted as readily with red-heads as with black-heads, says cognitive ecologist Jennifer Templeton of Knox College in Galesburg, Ill. That’s not smart because daughters typically fail to survive when Gouldian finches mate outside their cap color.

Also the male himself “becomes less attractive,” Templeton says. When the bird’s right eye was covered, he sang, bowed and posed less during his attempts at courtship. Some left-eyed males didn’t manage to make up their minds at all, but “just hopped around randomly,” Templeton says.

[Full article] In the eye of the beholder: visual mate choice lateralization in a polymorphic songbird