Pheromones Regulating Reproduction in Subsocial Beetles: Insights with References to Eusocial Insects.

Beetles have evolved diverse strategies to cope with environmental challenges. Although parents of the vast majority of beetle species do not take care of their offspring, there are some species, in which parents provide elaborate post-hatching care and remain temporarily associated with their offspring to defend them from competitors or to provision them with food. Usually, socially induced reproductive "control" is a core feature of eusocial societies, but here we highlight that already in small family groups, socially induced reproductive regulation can play a fundamental role. By discussing the family life of burying beetles, we illustrate the mechanisms behind such a reproductive "control" and show that - similar to eusocial insects - pheromones can be an important regulating factor. However, apart from burying beetles, our knowledge of pheromones or other signals mediating reproductive regulation is surprisingly rudimentary for social beetles. More data are required to broaden our currently patchy picture.

Pheromonal control: reconciling physiological mechanism with signalling theory.

Pheromones are intraspecific chemical signals. They can have profound effects on the behaviour and/or physiology of the receiver, and it is still common to hear pheromones described as controlling of the behaviour of the receiver. The discussion of pheromonal control arose initially from a close association between hormones and pheromones in the comparative physiological literature, but the concept of a controlling pheromone is at odds with contemporary signal evolution theory, which predicts that a manipulative pheromonal signal negatively affecting the receiver's fitness should not be stable over evolutionary time. Here we discuss the meaning of pheromonal control, and the ecological circumstances by which it might be supported. We argue that in discussing pheromonal control it is important to differentiate between control applied to the effects of a pheromone on a receiver's physiology (proximate control), and control applied to the effects of a pheromone on a receiver's fitness (ultimate control). Critically, a pheromone signal affecting change in the receiver's behaviour or physiology need not necessarily manipulate the fitness of a receiver. In cases where pheromonal signalling does lead to a reduction in the fitness of the receiver, the signalling system would be stable if the pheromone were an honest signal of a social environment that disadvantages the receiver, and the physiological and behavioural changes observed in the receiver were an adaptive response to the new social circumstances communicated by the pheromone.

The neuropeptide tachykinin is essential for pheromone detection in a gustatory neural circuit.

Gustatory pheromones play an essential role in shaping the behavior of many organisms. However, little is known about the processing of taste pheromones in higher order brain centers. Here, we describe a male-specific gustatory circuit in Drosophila that underlies the detection of the anti-aphrodisiac pheromone (3R,11Z,19Z)-3-acetoxy-11,19-octacosadien-1-ol (CH503). Using behavioral analysis, genetic manipulation, and live calcium imaging, we show that Gr68a-expressing neurons on the forelegs of male flies exhibit a sexually dimorphic physiological response to the pheromone and relay information to the central brain via peptidergic neurons. The release of tachykinin from 8 to 10 cells within the subesophageal zone is required for the pheromone-triggered courtship suppression. Taken together, this work describes a neuropeptide-modulated central brain circuit that underlies the programmed behavioral response to a gustatory sex pheromone. These results will allow further examination of the molecular basis by which innate behaviors are modulated by gustatory cues and physiological state.