ReviewDrosophila strategies to study psychiatric disorders
Highlights
► Drosophila is widely used to study neurodegenerative, but not psychiatric disorders. ► This difference is mainly caused by a lack of good behavioural assays. ► Strategies to use fruit flies to study complex psychiatric disorders are discussed. ► We propose two behavioural assays suitable for high throughput screening: quantifying sleep and quantifying arousal thresholds.
Introduction
Drosophila, lovingly nicknamed ‘the Golden Bug’ by some Drosophilists [15], has been a useful model organism to study several biological processes including genetics, development, molecular and cell biology, and neuroscience. Even though the arthropod evolutionary lineage separated from the vertebrate lineage over 600 million years ago [2], [131], their genetic and molecular make up is remarkably similar to vertebrates [49], [141]. While flies and humans have very different body plans, they are remarkably similar on the level of biological processes. For example, the central nervous system of flies and humans are derived from a common evolutionary origin [77] and several neurobiological processes are similar in Drosophila and Homo sapiens, including membrane excitability, neuronal signalling and shared classes of neurotransmitters [118].
The Drosophila genome consists of approximately 16–17,000 genes [75] distributed on four pairs of chromosomes, although the 4th chromosome is so tiny it is mostly irrelevant. In comparison, the human genome has ∼27,000 genes on 23 pairs of chromosomes. There is considerable overlap, as ∼75% of all human disease genes have a recognizable match in the Drosophila genome [138]. About one third of the human disease genes, involved in a broad spectrum of diseases, have sufficiently well conserved homologues to be studied in Drosophila [138].
The extensive genetic toolbox of Drosophila melanogaster is the envy of many biologists, although psychiatrists rarely consider such tools as relevant to their field. In addition to versatile genetics allowing temporal and spatial control of any gene's expression [22], the ability to quickly generate genetic variants with altered gene expression patterns is potentially useful in studying disorders such as schizophrenia and autism, because these diseases are likely to involve complex underlying genetic effects. Lists of candidate genes involved in psychiatric disorders are growing almost weekly as more genes are discovered in genome wide association studies (GWAS) resulting from large groups of patients and matched controls. For example, an online database of schizophrenia candidate genes currently lists over 1000 genes and over 8000 polymorphisms (www.szgene.org see [3]). Screening the function of so many genes in a mammalian model can be impractical, and understanding genetic interactions among these genes is almost impossible. Yet, it is likely that heritable cognitive disorders not only result from multiple gene effects, but also multiple genetic interactions [11], [35], [96], [135]. By making simple crosses of mutant strains and phenotyping their progeny, Drosophila researchers are able to unravel genetic mechanisms in ways not yet available to most vertebrate researchers, let alone psychiatrists. In addition to these small-animal benefits, Drosophila has a relatively simple genome with less redundancy than the human genome, so mutations to single genes are more likely to yield a measurable phenotype. Importantly, the fly brain has only about 100,000 neurons [148], compared to the 100 billion neurons of the human brain. The fruit fly thus seems to fit the bill on all counts for unravelling the biology of psychiatric disorders, in a simpler reductionist model.
However, there is an obvious problem with the Drosophila approach to psychiatry, leading to some pointed questions. To what extent can psychiatrists use fly behaviours to study what their human patients are experiencing? What exactly should we measure when screening Drosophila mutants for candidate genes based on human GWAS data? Perhaps because the answers to these questions are not obvious, the history of studying psychiatric disorders in Drosophila seems to have placed greater emphasis on genes and less on behaviour, often utilizing the same set of two or three readouts to provide the requisite behavioural histogram alongside the molecular data. We challenge this approach, and will discuss alternate behavioural strategies later in this review. First, however, we will cover the traditional approaches to studying these diseases in flies, some more successful than others.
As outlined in Fig. 1, there are three strategies to initiate a fly-based approach to studying cognitive disorders. In the first strategy (forward genetic screens), random mutations are tested for behavioural phenotypes. The second strategy (reverse genetics) uses known disorder genes, derived from patient studies, and examines their roles in an animal model. The third strategy uses animal models to test more general theories about disorders, by for example manipulating environmental variables.
In the forward genetic approach, random mutations are introduced in a population with the same genetic background, after which the resulting mutants are analysed based on their gain- or loss-of-function phenotypes. This is a powerful way to dissect molecular pathways underlying biological process. Drosophila genetics was pioneered a century ago by Morgan [111] and mutagenesis approaches were subsequently developed to modify the animal's DNA, by using chemicals such as ethyl methanesulfonate [50], [86], [87]. Thus, individual genetic lesions could be associated with phenotypes. Around the time when Drosophila mutagenesis was increasingly being applied to understanding physical phenotypes, Benzer and colleagues realized that this same approach could be used to link individual genes with behaviours [12] such as circadian activity rhythms [92] and olfactory learning and memory [39], [47], [137].
Behavioural phenotypes such as circadian locomotion or olfactory memory are Drosophila-specific, and the possible relevance of any mutants to human psychiatry can only be revealed by further studies in humans and flies. One example of this approach successfully informing psychiatric research can be found the dunce mutant. The phosphodiesterase II gene (PDE4B), which is mutant in dunce animals, was found by forward-genetic olfactory memory screens [47], but eventually also associated with schizophrenia [20], [56], [132]. Forward genetic screens have also played a crucial role in identifying genes involved in the regulation of sleep in Drosophila [32], [33], [179], and it is likely that some of these will also point to genes we should be examining in human patients, as disrupted sleep is also a recurring theme in many psychiatric disorders (see Sections 1 Introduction, 2 A, 3 , 3.1 Schizophrenia, 3.1.1 , 3.2 Autism spectrum disorders, 3.3 Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, 3.3.1 , 4 Problems with studying psychiatric diseases in, 5 Solving the problem with appropriate behavioural assays, 5.1 Modelling positive, negative and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia in animals, 6 Discussion, 6.1 Future directions, Conflict of interest below).
Alternatively, by using reverse-genetic strategies, specific genes of interest can be targeted in two ways. When a Drosophila homolog of the gene of interest exists, expression levels or patterns can be altered or disrupted. On the other hand, when there is no Drosophila homolog, function of a human disease gene can still be studied by expressing a variant of the human gene in the fly model. This latter approach proved fruitful studying neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's disease, by expressing human tau [101] or Amyloid Beta [80] in Drosophila [76]. In both reverse-genetic approaches, flies are tested for neurological phenotypes correlating with the disease, such as age-associated locomotion defects or cellular degeneration visualized by imaging the fly brain [80].
In a third approach, theories of the disease etiology or disease progression can be tested, for example by exposing flies to altered environmental conditions that are proposed to play a role in the disease. The Drosophila Fragile X story (below) provides an excellent example, where mGLuR5 activity was linked to the disease phenotype [97], and the severity of the defect was associated with the concentration of glutamate in the diet [28]. Other potential areas of investigation could include the link between drug use and psychosis [161] or links between schizophrenia and advanced paternal age [164].
While there are theoretically three viable approaches for studying neuropsychiatric diseases in Drosophila, there are really two lynchpins for success. The first is the extent to which disease genes have a fly homolog. This has recently been reviewed by O’Kane [118] for schizophrenia, autism, and bipolar disorder. The second lynchpin is the ability to test a fly mutant for symptoms of the disorder. As can be seen in Fig. 1, all three strategies converge on a common experimental endpoint, where the effect of the manipulation is evaluated. Without a way to evaluate the effect of genetic manipulations, genetic malleability of a model organism, no matter how advanced, becomes irrelevant. This creates a problem for complex, heterogenic disorders, such as schizophrenia and autism that have symptoms that are hard to measure in animal models. So far, the usefulness of Drosophila for studying neurological and psychiatric disorders is limited by the availability of good neurophysiological or behavioural tests. This second lynchpin, the lack of relevant tests, limits the perceived usefulness of fruit flies for studying complex psychiatric disorders. To some extent, Drosophilists are to blame for underselling their model in this regard, by reverting too often to three trusted standards – locomotion, circadian rhythms, and olfactory learning – rather than adding new behavioural phenotypes to widen the scope of research in modelling human diseases of the brain.
In the following section, we will discuss Drosophila approaches to two very different categories of disease, the relatively simple case of Fragile X, contrasted to the more complex conditions such as schizophrenia, autism, or ADHD. The study of Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is a representative example that illustrates the effective use of Drosophila to understand a neurological disorder and develop potential interventions.
Section snippets
A Drosophila success story: mental retardation and Fragile X syndrome
Fragile X syndrome is the most common form of inherited mental retardation, which affects approximately 1 in 2500 human males [57] and 1 in 8000 females [128]. It is a prototypical single gene disorder that is caused by loss of function mutations in a gene called Fragile X Mental Retardation1 (fmr1), which encodes for an RNA binding protein that represses RNA translation and inhibits protein synthesis [93], [120]. It is highly expressed in the human central nervous system [43].
Fragile X
Schizophrenia
Schizophrenia is highly heritable [159], with some heritability estimates of up to ∼80% [123]. However, the genetic mechanisms underlying the disorder are poorly understood. Unlike FXS, it is most likely not a single gene disorder. Instead, schizophrenia probably results from a ‘common disease-rare allele’ model [116], [152], [176], [180], which proposes that a large diversity of rare genetic variants individually account for the relatively high risk of schizophrenia [117]. The most compelling
Problems with studying psychiatric diseases in Drosophila
How successful has Drosophila research been in tackling psychiatric diseases? A review of the research output on fly models of different cognitive disorders is quite informative towards illustrating successes or failures in using Drosophila to study neuropsychiatric diseases (Fig. 2). When looking at the body of literature on Drosophila models of neurodegeneration, established models such as Fragile X or Parkinson's disease (PD) show similarly productive publication patterns, although for PD
Solving the problem with appropriate behavioural assays
A closer examination of behavioural symptoms for psychiatric disorders suggests that several seem to be a consequence of impaired sensory filtering mechanisms. The most obvious examples are delusions and hallucinations, where a patient tries to make sense of aberrant salience attributed to random events in the environment [88], [166].
A well known phenomenon of sensory filtering that is present in humans and other animals is prepulse inhibition (PPI). PPI is a sensory motor gating mechanism
Discussion
We propose that quantifying low level sensory filtering impairments is the best starting point for modelling complex psychiatric disorders in Drosophila. Instead of trying to replicate complex behavioural phenotypes such as impaired cognitive abilities or dysfunctional social interactions, it might be more fruitful to study their underlying processes, such as impaired attention-like processes and altered arousal thresholds. This approach would allow Drosophila researchers to circumvent the
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Sean Millard, Peter Stratton and Leonie Kriszenblat for helpful comments on the manuscript. Bruno van Swinderen is supported by Australian Research Council Future Fellowship FT100100725.
References (188)
- et al.
Dopaminergic modulation of arousal in Drosophila
Curr. Biol.
(2005) - et al.
Drosophila neuroligin 1 promotes growth and postsynaptic differentiation at glutamatergic neuromuscular junctions
Neuron
(2010) - et al.
Schizophrenia genetics: dysbindin under the microscope
Trends Neurosci.
(2004) - et al.
Sleep disturbances in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry
(1998) - et al.
A cross-sectional analysis of reported corporate environmental sustainability practices
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
(2010) Traces of Drosophila memory
Neuron
(2011)- et al.
Drosophila lacking dfmr1 activity show defects in circadian output and fail to maintain courtship interest
Neuron
(2002) - et al.
Molecular genetics of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
Biol. Psychiatry
(2005) - et al.
PDE4B polymorphisms and decreased PDE4B expression are associated with schizophrenia
Schizophr. Res.
(2008) - et al.
Screening for expanded alleles of the FMR1 gene in blood spots from newborn males in a Spanish population
J. Mol. Diagn.
(2009)
Sleep enhances plasticity in the developing visual cortex
Neuron
A cellular mechanism for prepulse inhibition
Neuron
Modeling schizophrenia in flies
Prog. Brain Res.
Animal models of autism spectrum disorders: information for neurotoxicologists
Neurotoxicology
A role for the Drosophila fragile X-related gene in circadian output
Curr. Biol.
The induction of mosaic and complete dumpy mutants in Drosophila melanogaster with ethyl methanesulfonate
Mutat. Res.
Modeling cognitive endophenotypes of schizophrenia in mice
Trends Neurosci.
Fragile X syndrome
Adv. Pediatr.
Two different forms of arousal in Drosophila are oppositely regulated by the dopamine D1 receptor ortholog DopR via distinct neural circuits
Neuron
Pharmacological rescue of synaptic plasticity, courtship behavior, and mushroom body defects in a Drosophila model of fragile X syndrome
Neuron
Mushroom body ablation impairs short-term memory and long-term memory of courtship conditioning in Drosophila melanogaster
Neuron
Advances in autism genetics: on the threshold of a new neurobiology
Nat. Rev. Genet.
The new animal phylogeny: reliability and implications
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
Systematic meta-analyses and field synopsis of genetic association studies in schizophrenia: the SzGene database
Nat. Genet.
Genetic mapping in human disease
Science
Drosophila as a new model organism for the neurobiology of aggression?
J. Exp. Biol.
Short- and long-term memory are modulated by multiple isoforms of the fragile X mental retardation protein
J. Neurosci.
100 years of Drosophila research and its impact on vertebrate neuroscience: a history lesson for the future
Nat. Rev. Neurosci.
Interactions among genes in the ErbB-Neuregulin signalling network are associated with increased susceptibility to schizophrenia
Behav. Brain Funct.
Behavioral mutants of Drosophila isolated by countercurrent distribution
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
A pilot open label, single dose trial of fenobam in adults with fragile X syndrome
J. Med. Genet.
Fragile X syndrome and model organisms: identifying potential routes of therapeutic intervention
Dis. Model. Mech.
Drosophila, the golden bug, emerges as a tool for human genetics
Nat. Rev. Genet.
Support for association between ADHD and two candidate genes: NET1 and DRD1
Am. J. Med. Genet. B: Neuropsychiatr. Genet.
Excess protein synthesis in Drosophila fragile X mutants impairs long-term memory
Nat. Neurosci.
An assay for social interaction in Drosophila Fragile X mutants
Fly (Austin)
Sleep to remember
Neuroscientist
DISC1-binding proteins in neural development, signalling and schizophrenia
Neuropharmacology
Advances in endophenotyping schizophrenia
World Psychiatry
Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes
Development
Sleep–wake cycles and cognitive functioning in schizophrenia
Br. J. Psychiatry
Behavioural profiles of inbred mouse strains used as transgenic backgrounds. I: motor tests
Genes Brain Behav.
Big ideas for small brains: what can psychiatry learn from worms, flies, bees and fish?
Mol. Psychiatry
Sleep and synaptic homeostasis: structural evidence in Drosophila
Science
Genetic overlap between autism, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder
Genome Med.
Identification of small molecules rescuing fragile X syndrome phenotypes in Drosophila
Nat. Chem. Biol.
Neurexin in embryonic Drosophila neuromuscular junctions
PLoS One
Fighting fruit flies: a model system for the study of aggression
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
Age-dependent cognitive impairment in a Drosophila fragile X model and its pharmacological rescue
Biogerontology
Searching for sleep mutants of Drosophila melanogaster
Bioessays
Cited by (64)
The translational genetics of ADHD and related phenotypes in model organisms
2023, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral ReviewsCitation Excerpt :ADHD is a phenotypically complex disorder, which in its complexity cannot be recapitulated in Drosophila or other animal models. Nonetheless, there are many behavioral traits sharing biological mechanisms with ADHD that lend themselves to modelling in animals, and numerous approaches to study them in Drosophila exist (Coll-Tane et al., 2019; Van Alphen and Van Swinderen, 2013; van der Voet et al., 2014). This also applies to behavioral assays that are relevant to the core symptom domains of ADHD: (in)attention, (hyper)activity, and impulsivity.
Rare NRXN1 missense variants identified in autism interfered protein degradation and Drosophila sleeping
2021, Journal of Psychiatric ResearchAdvances in next-generation sequencing technologies and functional investigation of candidate variants in neurological and behavioral disorders
2021, Encyclopedia of Behavioral Neuroscience: Second EditionThe Drosophila ortholog of the schizophrenia-associated CACNA1A and CACNA1B voltage-gated calcium channels regulate memory, sleep and circadian rhythms
2021, Neurobiology of DiseaseCitation Excerpt :Drosophila genes are molecularly and functionally conserved with humans, with about 80% of disease-causing genes having a strong fly ortholog (Şentürk and Bellen, 2018). Fly models of human disease can be based on mutations in the fly ortholog of the human disease gene or by expressing the human disease causing gene (Şentürk and Bellen, 2018; Van Alphen and Van Swinderen, 2013). A recent GWAS for differential size of human brain regions, identified genes involved in neurodevelopment, synaptic signalling and neurological disease susceptibility.
Rodent and fly models in behavioral neuroscience: An evaluation of methodological advances, comparative research, and future perspectives
2021, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews