An interaction between cancer progression and social environment in Drosophila
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (Peer Community in Evolutionary Biology)
Abstract
This preprint has been reviewed and recommended by Peer Community In Evolutionary Biology ( http://dx.doi.ors/10.24072/pci.evolbiol.100030 )
The influence of oncogenic phenomena on the ecology and evolution of animal species is fast becoming an important research topic. Similar to host-pathogen interactions, cancer negatively affects host fitness, which should lead to the selection of host control mechanisms, including behavioral traits that best minimize the proliferation of malignant cells. Social behavior is one such trait, which is suggested to influence cancer progression. While the ecological benefits of sociality in gregarious species are widely acknowledged, only limited data are available on the role of the social environment on cancer progression. Here, we exposed adult Drosophila , with colorectal-like tumors, to different social environments. First, we show that cancerous flies kept in complete isolation exhibit increased tumor progression. Yet, more surprisingly, we find that cancerous flies, kept in groups with other non-cancerous individuals, also develop tumors at a faster rate compared to those kept with other cancerous conspecifics, suggesting a strong impact of social group composition on cancer growth. Finally, we show that flies can discriminate between individuals at different stages of tumor growth and selectively choose their social environment accordingly. Control flies actively avoid flies with cancer but only at the later stages of tumor development, whereas cancerous flies display strong social interactions with cancerous flies in the early stages of tumor growth. Our study demonstrates the reciprocal links between cancer and social interactions, as well as highlighting how sociality impacts health and fitness in animals and its potential implications for disease ecology and ecosystem dynamics.
Article activity feed
-
Drosophila flies may not be perceived as a quintessentially social animal, particularly when compared to their eusocial hymenopteran cousins. Although they have no parental care, division of labour or subfertile caste, fruit flies nevertheless exhibit an array of social phenotypes that are potentially comparable to those of their highly social relatives. In the wild, Drosophila adults cluster around food resources where courtship, mating activity and oviposition occur. Recent work has shown not only that social interactions in these clusters condition many aspects of the behaviour and physiology of the flies [1] but also, and perhaps more unexpectedly, that social isolation has a negative impact on their fitness [2].
Many studies in humans point to the role of social isolation as a source of stress that can induce and accelerate …
Drosophila flies may not be perceived as a quintessentially social animal, particularly when compared to their eusocial hymenopteran cousins. Although they have no parental care, division of labour or subfertile caste, fruit flies nevertheless exhibit an array of social phenotypes that are potentially comparable to those of their highly social relatives. In the wild, Drosophila adults cluster around food resources where courtship, mating activity and oviposition occur. Recent work has shown not only that social interactions in these clusters condition many aspects of the behaviour and physiology of the flies [1] but also, and perhaps more unexpectedly, that social isolation has a negative impact on their fitness [2].
Many studies in humans point to the role of social isolation as a source of stress that can induce and accelerate disease progression. The ultimate proof of the connection between social interaction and disease is however mired in confounding variables and alternative explanations so the subject, though crucial, remains controversial. With a series of elegant experiments using Drosophila flies that develop an inducible form of intestinal cancer, Dawson et al [3] show that cancer progresses more rapidly in flies maintained in isolation than in flies maintained with other cancerous flies. Further, cancerous flies kept with non-cancerous flies, fare just as badly as when kept alone. Their experiments suggest that this is due to the combined effect of healthy flies avoiding contact with cancerous flies (even though this is a non-contagious disease), and of cancerous flies having higher quality interactions with other cancerous flies than with healthy ones. Perceived isolation is therefore as pernicious as real isolation when it comes to cancer progression in these flies. Like all good research, this study opens up as many questions as it answers, in particular the why and wherefores of the flies’ extraordinary social behaviour in the face of disease.
References
[1] Camiletti AL and Thompson GJ. 2016. Drosophila as a genetically tractable model for social insect behavior. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 4: 40. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2016.00040
[2] Ruan H and Wu C-F. 2008. Social interaction-mediated lifespan extension of Drosophila Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase mutants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 105: 7506-7510. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0711127105
[3] Dawson E, Bailly T, Dos Santos J, Moreno C, Devilliers M, Maroni B, Sueur C, Casali A, Ujvari B, Thomas F, Montagne J, Mery F. 2017. An interaction between cancer progression and social environment in Drosophila. BiorXiv, 143560, ver. 3 of 19th September 2017. doi: 10.1101/143560
-
