Gene expression profiles in the brain predict behavior in individual honey bees

Science

Volumn 302, Issue 5643, 2003, Pages 296-299

  Whitfield, Charles W ^a   Cziko, Anne Marie ^a   Robinson, Gene E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; BRAIN; RNA;

GENOMIC PLASTICITY;

GENETIC ENGINEERING;

MESSENGER RNA;

AGE-RELATED DIFFERENCE; BEE; BEHAVIOR; GENE EXPRESSION;

AGE; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; BRAIN; DNA MICROARRAY; FORAGING; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENOME; HONEYBEE; NERVE CELL PLASTICITY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

AGING; ANIMALS; BEES; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; BRAIN; DNA, COMPLEMENTARY; DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER; EXPRESSED SEQUENCE TAGS; FEMALE; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENES, INSECT; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE ARRAY SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; RNA, MESSENGER;

ANIMALIA; APINAE; APIS MELLIFERA; APOIDEA; INSECTA;

EID: 0141958956     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1086807     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. R. J. Greenspan, Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 7, 805 (1997).
2. G. E. Robinson, Y. Ben-Shahar, Genes Brain Behav. 1, 197 (2002).
3. S. Cavallaro, V. D'Agata, D. L. Alkon, Neurochem. Res. 27, 1201 (2002).
4. P. D. Etter, M. Ramaswami, Bioessays 24, 494 (2002).
5. J. A. Mong et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100, 318 (2003).
6. J. Dubnau et al., Curr. Biol. 13, 286 (2003).
7. D. P. Toma, K. P. White, J. Hirsch, R. J. Greenspan, Nature Genet. 31, 349 (2002).
8. Nature Neurosci. 6, 647 (2003).
9. D. Wahlsten et al., J. Neurobiol. 54, 283 (2003).
10. M. L. Winston, The Biology of the Honey Bee (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987).
11. H. A. Hofmann, R. D. Femald, J. Neurosci. 20, 4740 (2000).
12. J. B. Becker, D. Crews, S. M. Breedlove, Eds., Behavioral Endocrinology (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992).
13. G. E. Robinson, Am. Nat., 160, S160 (2002).
14. R. Kucharski, R. Mateszka, Genome Biol. 3, research0007 (2002).
15. A previous study incorporating microarray and Northern blot analyses (14) did not assess the significance of microarray results with statistical methods, so the extent of significant changes was not known.
16. G. F. Oster, E. O. Wilson, Caste and Ecology in the Social Insects (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 1978), pp. 151-154.
17. Materials and methods are available as supporting material on Science Online.
18. C. W. Whitfield et al., Genome Res. 12, 555 (2002).
19. G. A. Churchill, Nature Genet. 32 (suppl.), 490 (2002).
20. J. P. Townsend, D. L. Hartl, Genome Biol. 3, research0071 (2002).
21. G. Gibson, Mol. Ecol. 11, 17 (2002).
22. D. K. Slonim, Nature Genet. 32 (suppl.), 502 (2002).
23. C. H. Chung, P. S. Bernard, C. M. Perou, Nature Genet. 32 (suppl.), 533 (2002).
24. Y. Ben-Shahar, A. Robichon, M. B. Sokolowski, G. E. Robinson, Science 296, 741 (2002).
25. The foraging gene was not represented on microarrays used in this study [due to failure of polymerase chain reaction (PCR)], but subsequent microarray studies (32) show expression results consistent with published rest (24).
26. M. K. Sun, D. L. Alkon, Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 23, 83 (2002).
27. D. L. Korol, P. E. Gold, Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 67, 764S (1998).
28. Honey Bee Genome Project, Baylor College of Medicine (http://hgsc.bcm.tmc.edu/projects/honeybee/).
29. In addition to differences between nurses and foragers, young "precocious" foragers and old foragers appeared to be different in both principal component analysis (Fig. 1C, PC1) and in their expression of a set of coregulated chaperones including H5P90 (Fig. 2A), asterisk). We found that 6 out of 6 young foragers showed strong up-regulation of HSP90 whereas only 11 out of 24 old foragers showed similar up-regulation. This apparent difference between young and old foragers, although of large average magnitude, was not significant in Bayesian analysis due to large variation in HSP90 expression between individuals. In addition, analysis of HSP90 in six other young foragers by real-time quantitative reverse transcription (RT)-PCR (17) indicated strong up-regulation in just four out of six individuals (33), indicating that HSP90 up-regulation does not occur consistently in all young foragers. Further analysis (fig. 53) suggested that differences between young foragers and old foragers for PC1 in Fig. 1C were associated with differences in average HSP90 expression. In contrast, differences between nurses and old foragers for PC1 were not associated with differences in HSP90 expression (fig. 53).
30. J. Alcock, Animal Behavior: An Evolutionary Approach (Sinauer, Sunderland, MA, ed. 7, 2001).
31. M. Brett, I. S. Johnsrude, A. M. Owen, Nature Rev. Neurosci. 3, 243 (2002).
32. A. C. Cash, C. W. Whitfield, G. E. Robinson, unpublished data.
33. C. W. Whitfield, A.-M. Cziko, G. E. Robinson, data not shown.
34. Functional annotations for Drosophila genes were obtained from FlyBase (http://flybase.bio.indiana.edu/).
35. We thank A. J. Ross, K. Jez, and J. Wermeling for assistance with bees and brain dissections; Z. Huang for hypopharyngeal gland samples; M. R. Band, A. Bari, P. Kheradpour, and L. Liu for microarray fabrication and bioinformatics; S. Rodriguez-Zas, S. A. Cameron, J. B. Whitfield, and G. A. Churchill for help with statistical analyses; L. Wraight for qRT-PCR analysis; P. E. Gold for helpful discussion; H. A. Lewin for advice throughout the project; and S. E. Fahrbach, R. A. Hoskins, K. A. Hughes, S. K. Kim, H. A. Lewin, M. L. Sokolowski, and members of the Robinson lab for reviewing the manuscript. Supported by an NSF Post-doctoral Fellowship in Bioinformatics (C.W.W.) and grants from the University of Illinois Critical Research Initiatives Program and the Burroughs Wellcome Trust (G.E.R.). Gene expression data meet Minimum Information About a Microarray Experiment (MIAME) standards and have been deposited at ArrayExpress (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/arrayexpress/) with accession numbers A-MEXP-24 and A-MEXP-26.