1
|
Buffry AD, Currea JP, Franke-Gerth FA, Palavalli-Nettimi R, Bodey AJ, Rau C, Samadi N, Gstöhl SJ, Schlepütz CM, McGregor AP, Sumner-Rooney L, Theobald J, Kittelmann M. Evolution of compound eye morphology underlies differences in vision between closely related Drosophila species. BMC Biol 2024; 22:67. [PMID: 38504308 PMCID: PMC10953123 DOI: 10.1186/s12915-024-01864-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2023] [Accepted: 03/07/2024] [Indexed: 03/21/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Insects have evolved complex visual systems and display an astonishing range of adaptations for diverse ecological niches. Species of Drosophila melanogaster subgroup exhibit extensive intra- and interspecific differences in compound eye size. These differences provide an excellent opportunity to better understand variation in insect eye structure and the impact on vision. Here we further explored the difference in eye size between D. mauritiana and its sibling species D. simulans. RESULTS We confirmed that D. mauritiana have rapidly evolved larger eyes as a result of more and wider ommatidia than D. simulans since they recently diverged approximately 240,000 years ago. The functional impact of eye size, and specifically ommatidia size, is often only estimated based on the rigid surface morphology of the compound eye. Therefore, we used 3D synchrotron radiation tomography to measure optical parameters in 3D, predict optical capacity, and compare the modelled vision to in vivo optomotor responses. Our optical models predicted higher contrast sensitivity for D. mauritiana, which we verified by presenting sinusoidal gratings to tethered flies in a flight arena. Similarly, we confirmed the higher spatial acuity predicted for Drosophila simulans with smaller ommatidia and found evidence for higher temporal resolution. CONCLUSIONS Our study demonstrates that even subtle differences in ommatidia size between closely related Drosophila species can impact the vision of these insects. Therefore, further comparative studies of intra- and interspecific variation in eye morphology and the consequences for vision among other Drosophila species, other dipterans and other insects are needed to better understand compound eye structure-function and how the diversification of eye size, shape, and function has helped insects to adapt to the vast range of ecological niches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra D Buffry
- Department of Biological and Medical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, OX3 0BP, UK
| | - John P Currea
- Integrative Biology and Physiology, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA
| | - Franziska A Franke-Gerth
- Molecular Evolution and Systematics of Animals, Institute of Biology, University of Leipzig, Talstrasse 33, 04103, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Ravindra Palavalli-Nettimi
- Institute of the Environment and Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Andrew J Bodey
- Diamond Light Source Ltd, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, UK
| | - Christoph Rau
- Diamond Light Source Ltd, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, UK
| | - Nazanin Samadi
- Swiss Light Source, Paul Scherrer Institute, Forschungsstrasse 111, 5232, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - Stefan J Gstöhl
- Swiss Light Source, Paul Scherrer Institute, Forschungsstrasse 111, 5232, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - Christian M Schlepütz
- Swiss Light Source, Paul Scherrer Institute, Forschungsstrasse 111, 5232, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - Alistair P McGregor
- Department of Biosciences, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK
| | - Lauren Sumner-Rooney
- Museum Für Naturkunde, Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Research, Berlin, 10115, Germany
| | - Jamie Theobald
- Institute of the Environment and Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Maike Kittelmann
- Department of Biological and Medical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, OX3 0BP, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Fenk LM, Avritzer SC, Weisman JL, Nair A, Randt LD, Mohren TL, Siwanowicz I, Maimon G. Muscles that move the retina augment compound eye vision in Drosophila. Nature 2022; 612:116-122. [PMID: 36289333 PMCID: PMC10103069 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-05317-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2020] [Accepted: 09/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Most animals have compound eyes, with tens to thousands of lenses attached rigidly to the exoskeleton. A natural assumption is that all of these species must resort to moving either their head or their body to actively change their visual input. However, classic anatomy has revealed that flies have muscles poised to move their retinas under the stable lenses of each compound eye1-3. Here we show that Drosophila use their retinal muscles to smoothly track visual motion, which helps to stabilize the retinal image, and also to perform small saccades when viewing a stationary scene. We show that when the retina moves, visual receptive fields shift accordingly, and that even the smallest retinal saccades activate visual neurons. Using a head-fixed behavioural paradigm, we find that Drosophila perform binocular, vergence movements of their retinas-which could enhance depth perception-when crossing gaps, and impairing the physiology of retinal motor neurons alters gap-crossing trajectories during free behaviour. That flies evolved an ability to actuate their retinas suggests that moving the eye independently of the head is broadly paramount for animals. The similarities of smooth and saccadic movements of the Drosophila retina and the vertebrate eye highlight a notable example of convergent evolution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa M Fenk
- Laboratory of Integrative Brain Function and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA.
- Active Sensing, Max Planck Institute for Biological Intelligence (in foundation), Martinsried, Germany.
| | - Sofia C Avritzer
- Laboratory of Integrative Brain Function and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jazz L Weisman
- Laboratory of Integrative Brain Function and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Aditya Nair
- Laboratory of Integrative Brain Function and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Lucas D Randt
- Active Sensing, Max Planck Institute for Biological Intelligence (in foundation), Martinsried, Germany
| | - Thomas L Mohren
- Laboratory of Integrative Brain Function and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Igor Siwanowicz
- Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, VA, USA
| | - Gaby Maimon
- Laboratory of Integrative Brain Function and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|