The developmental control of size in insects

The mechanisms that control the sizes of a body and its many parts remain among the great puzzles in developmental biology. Why do animals grow to a species-specific body size, and how is the relative growth of their body parts controlled to so they grow to the right size, and in the correct proportion with body size, giving an animal its species-characteristic shape? Control of size must involve mechanisms that somehow assess some aspect of size and are upstream of mechanisms that regulate growth. These mechanisms are now beginning to be understood in the insects, in particular in Manduca sexta and Drosophila melanogaster. The control of size requires control of the rate of growth and control of the cessation of growth. Growth is controlled by genetic and environmental factors. Insulin and ecdysone, their receptors, and intracellular signaling pathways are the principal genetic regulators of growth. The secretion of these growth hormones, in turn, is controlled by complex interactions of other endocrine and molecular mechanisms, by environmental factors such as nutrition, and by the physiological mechanisms that sense body size. Although the general mechanisms of growth regulation appear to be widely shared, the mechanisms that regulate final size can be quite diverse.

Hox genes and regional patterning of the vertebrate body plan

Several decades have passed since the discovery of Hox genes in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. Their unique ability to regulate morphologies along the anteroposterior (AP) axis (Lewis, 1978) earned them well-deserved attention as important regulators of embryonic development. Phenotypes due to loss- and gain-of-function mutations in mouse Hox genes have revealed that the spatio-temporally controlled expression of these genes is critical for the correct morphogenesis of embryonic axial structures. Here, we review recent novel insight into the modalities of Hox protein function in imparting specific identity to anatomical regions of the vertebral column, and in controlling the emergence of these tissues concomitantly with providing them with axial identity. The control of these functions must have been intimately linked to the shaping of the body plan during evolution.

Drosophila melanogaster larvae make nutritional choices that minimize developmental time

Organisms from slime moulds to humans carefully regulate their macronutrient intake to optimize a wide range of life history characters including survival, stress resistance, and reproductive success. However, life history characters often differ in their response to nutrition, forcing organisms to make foraging decisions while balancing the trade-offs between these effects. To date, we have a limited understanding of how the nutritional environment shapes the relationship between life history characters and foraging decisions. To gain insight into the problem, we used a geometric framework for nutrition to assess how the protein and carbohydrate content of the larval diet affected key life history traits in the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. In no-choice assays, survival from egg to pupae, female and male body size, and ovariole number - a proxy for female fecundity - were maximized at the highest protein to carbohydrate (P:C) ratio (1.5:1). In contrast, development time was minimized at intermediate P:C ratios, around 1:2. Next, we subjected larvae to two-choice tests to determine how they regulated their protein and carbohydrate intake in relation to these life history traits. Our results show that larvae targeted their consumption to P:C ratios that minimized development time. Finally, we examined whether adult females also chose to lay their eggs in the P:C ratios that minimized developmental time. Using a three-choice assay, we found that adult females preferentially laid their eggs in food P:C ratios that were suboptimal for all larval life history traits. Our results demonstrate that D. melanogaster larvae make foraging decisions that trade-off developmental time with body size, ovariole number, and survival. In addition, adult females make oviposition decisions that do not appear to benefit the larvae. We propose that these decisions may reflect the living nature of the larval nutritional environment in rotting fruit. These studies illustrate the interaction between the nutritional environment, life history traits, and foraging choices in D. melanogaster, and lend insight into the ecology of their foraging decisions.