Contrasting influences of Drosophila white/mini-white on ethanol sensitivity in two different behavioral assays.

paper Cited Public

Authors: Chan, Robin F; Lewellyn, Lara; DeLoyht, Jacqueline M; Sennett, Kristyn; Coffman, Scarlett; Hewitt, Matthew; Bettinger, Jill C; Warrick, John M; Grotewiel, Mike
Year: 2014
Journal: Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research
PMID: 24890118
DOI: 10.1111/acer.12421
PMCID: PMC4049357

Figure 1

Mini-w and endogenous w influence ethanol sensitivity measured in eRING assaysA. Flies harboring transposon insertions in TGFβR genes (tkv, wit and babo; blue circles), Akap200 (green triangles) or Gal4 drivers (red squares) were ranked by eye color (w+ rank, X axis) and tested in eRING assays for sedation to ethanol vapor from 30% ethanol (TGFβR and Gal4 drivers) or 50% ethanol (Akap200). Compiled T50 values (fold of w1118 controls) from all genotypes correlated with w+ rank (Pearson r=0.7503, p<0.0001). TGFβR lines tested were tkv alleles 7, 8, d07811, f02766, f03305, c06013 and KG05071, wit alleles d02492, e00566 and e01243 and babo alleles c04263, c05710, k16912. Akap200 lines tested were EP2254, c01373, d01782, d03938, d07255, EY04645 and EY12242. Gal4 lines tested were da-Gal4/+, mef2-Gal4/+, Appl-Gal4/+, Actin5cGal4/+, GMR-Gal4/+, 24B-Gal4/+, and elav-Gal4/+. See Figure S3 for representative eye color images. B. There was an overall effect of genotype on T50s from eRING studies using vapor from 30% ethanol (one-way ANOVA, p=0.0003, n=10 per genotype). mini-w-expressing elav-Gal4/+ and v30034/+ flies had elevated T50 values compared to white-eyed w1118 controls and elav-Gal4,v30034 white knockdown flies (*Bonferroni’s, p<0.05). T50s in w1118 controls and elav-Gal4,v30034 flies were not distinguishable (Bonferroni’s, n.s.). C. T50s in w1118 flies tested in eRING studies with vapor from 30% ethanol were significantly lower than in w+ flies (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for Gaussian distribution; w1118, p>0.01, n.s.; w+, p=0.0017, significantly non-Gaussian; *Mann-Whitney test, p=0.0147, n=10).

Figure 2

Exposure to ethanol vapor in ethanol sedation assays causes dose-dependent sedation and internal ethanol concentrationsData are from w1118 control female (A, C and E) and male (B, D and F) flies exposed to vapor from the indicated concentrations of ethanol (0, 30, 40 and 50%). A and B. Ethanol sedation time-course. Time and ethanol concentration had significant effects on percent active flies and there was a significant interaction between time and ethanol concentration for both females and males (individual two-way ANOVAs; time, p<0.0001; ethanol concentration, p<0.0001; interaction, p<0.0001; n=5 for females, n=10 for males). C and D. Ethanol sedation ST50 values. ST50 values derived from the data in panels A and B were significantly affected by ethanol concentration in both males and females (individual one-way ANOVAs, p<0.0001, n=5 for females, n=10 for males). ST50 values in response to all ethanol concentrations were significantly different (Bonferroni’s multiple comparison, p<0.001 in all cases). ST50 values cannot be calculated for flies exposed to 0% ethanol (water) because flies do not become sedated in the absence of the drug. E and F. Internal ethanol concentrations. A 60-minute exposure to vapor from increasing concentrations of ethanol progressively increased whole body internal ethanol concentrations in flies (individual one-way ANOVAs, p≤0.0002, n=6 for females, n=5 for males). Internal ethanol after any given exposure was significantly different from internal ethanol in the next lower and higher groups (Bonferroni’s, p<0.05).

Figure 3

Rapid tolerance to ethanol in ethanol sedation assaysData are from w1118 control female (A, C and E) and male (B, D and F) flies. A and B. Sedation time-courses from flies exposed once to vapor from water (W), exposed once to vapor from 50% ethanol (E), exposed to water vapor, allowed to recover for 4 hours, then exposed to vapor from 50% ethanol (WE), and exposed to vapor from 50% ethanol, allowed to recover for 4 hours, then exposed again to ethanol vapor (EE). Time and ethanol treatment had significant effects on the percentage of active flies and there was an interaction between time and ethanol treatment (individual two-way ANOVAs; time, p<0.0001; ethanol treatment, p<0.0001; interaction, p<0.0001, n=5–32 per treatment group). C and D. ST50 values derived from the data in panels A and B were significantly affected by ethanol treatment (one-way ANOVA, p<0.0001). ST50 values in EE flies were significantly different from those in E and WE flies (*Bonferroni’s, p<0.001), whereas ST50 values in E and WE flies were not statistically distinguishable (Bonferroni’s multiple comparison, n.s.). E and F. Internal ethanol concentrations increased with time of ethanol exposure, but were not significantly different in E and EE flies (individual two-way ANOVAs; time, p≤0.0002; E vs. EE, n.s.).

Figure 4

Expression of mini-w has a negligible impact on ethanol sedation sensitivity and internal ethanol concentrations in ethanol sedation assaysA. Compiled ST50 values from ethanol sedation assays with vapor from 50% ethanol did not correlate with w+ rank in TGFβR (blue circles), Akap200 (green triangles) and Gal4 (red squares) strains (Pearson r=−0.1754, p=0.4125, n.s.). ST50 values are represented as fold of w1118 controls. B. Knockdown of mini-w in the nervous system and initial sensitivity to ethanol. Expression of w RNAi transgenes (v30033 and v30034) was driven in the nervous system by elav-Gal4. Genotype had a significant overall effect on ST50 values from ethanol sedation assays with vapor from 50% ethanol (one-way ANOVA, p=0.0008, n=8–16 per genotype). ST50 values in w1118, elav-Ga4/+, v30033/+ and v30034/+ genotypes were not statistically different (Bonferroni’s, n.s.). ST50 values in elav-Gal4;v30033 and elav-Gal4/v30034 knockdown animals were greater than in elav-Ga4/+ (Bonferroni’s, *p<0.05), but were not significantly different from v30033/+ or v30034/+ controls (Bonferroni’s, n.s.). C. Internal ethanol concentrations in nervous system mini-w knockdown flies after 30 minutes of exposure to vapor from 50% ethanol in ethanol sedation assays. Genotype had a significant overall effect on internal ethanol (one-way ANOVA; p=0.0388; n=4), but no differences between relevant genotype pairs were found (Bonferroni’s, n.s.).

Figure 5

Nervous system knockdown of mini-w in flies with altered sensitivity to ethanolExpression of v30034 along with either Cnx14D RNAi v5597 (A) or ph-p RNAi v50024 (B) RNAi was driven in the nervous system by elav-Gal4. All flies tested were females. A. Knockdown of mini-w in the nervous system of in flies with decreased sedation in response to vapor from 50% ethanol. There was a significant overall effect of genotype on ST50s (one-way ANOVA, p<0.0001, n=8). ST50 values were not significantly different in w1118, v5597/+, elav-Gal4/+ or elav-Gal4,v30034/+ flies (Bonferroni’s, n.s.). elav-Gal4/v5597 and elav-Gal4,v30034/v5597 exhibited significantly higher ST50 values compared to relevant controls (*Bonferroni’s, p<0.05 compared to v5597/+ and elav-Gal4/+; **Bonferroni’s, p<0.05 compared to v5597/+ and elav-Gal4,v30034). elav-Gal4/v5597 and elav-Gal4,v30034/v5597 were not statistically distinguishable (Bonferroni’s, n.s.). B. Knockdown of mini-w in the nervous system in flies with increased sensitivity to sedation from vapor from 50% ethanol. Overall, genotype had a significant effect on ST50s (one-way ANOVA, p<0.0001, n=8). ST50 values were indistinguishable in w1118, elav-Gal4/+ and elav-Gal4,v30034/+, whereas the ph- v50024/+ control was significantly different from w1118 (#Bonferroni’s, p<0.05). elav-Gal4;v50024 and elav-Gal4/v30034;v50024 were not different from each other, but they were significantly different from their relevant controls (*Bonferroni’s, p<0.05 compared to elav-Gal4/+ and v50024/+; **Bonferroni’s, p<0.05 compared to elav-Gal4/+ and elav-Gal4,v30034).

Figure 6

Ethanol sedation sensitivity and internal ethanol concentrations in w null and w wild-type fliesST50 values in response to vapor from 50% ethanol were indistinguishable in w null (w1118) and w wild-type (w+) females (panel A, unpaired t-test, n.s., n=6 for w1118, n=21 for w+) or males (panel B, (unpaired t-test, n.s., n=10 per genotype). C and D. Internal ethanol concentrations in response to vapor from 50% ethanol were not distinguishable in w1118 and w+ females (C) and males (D), but were affected by duration of ethanol exposure (individual two-way ANOVAs; effect of w genotype, n.s.; effect of ethanol exposure time, p<0.0001; n=5 per genotype, sex and exposure time).

Figure 7

Mutations in and RNAi-mediated knockdown of Clic reduce ethanol sensitivity in ethanol sedation assaysST50s were greater in homozygous ClicG0472 (A) and ClicEY04209 (B) transposon mutants (closed bars) than in w1118 controls (open bars) (*individual t tests, p≤0.027, n=10 per genotype) in ethanol sedation assays with vapor from 50% ethanol. Control and Clic mutant flies were reared at 20°C to circumvent homozygous lethality of the Clic alleles at 25°C. Ubiquitous (via da-Gal4, panel C, filled bar) or nervous system (via elav-Gal4, panel D, filled bar) expression of RNAi targeting Clic (v105975) lowered ethanol sensitivity compared to Gal4/+ and v105975/+ controls (open bars) (individual one-way ANOVAs, p<0.0001; *Bonferroni, p<0.05 compared to controls; n=8–10 per group). Internal ethanol concentrations were not consistently different in ubiquitous (E) and nervous system (F) Clic knockdown flies compared to Gal4 and v105975 controls (individual one-way ANOVAs; panel E, p=0.0288; panel F, p=0.0003; n=5; *Bonferroni’s multiple comparisons test, p<0.05 compared to Gal4 controls). Controls are (A) w1118 in a Canton-S background, (B) 2202U, (C) WTB, and (D) the progeny from NPFR1-Gal4 or NPFR1-RNAi crossed to our standard w1118 strain.

#	Section	Preview
40	Figure 2	Exposure to ethanol vapor in ethanol sedation assays causes dose-dependent sedation and internal…
41	Figure 3	Rapid tolerance to ethanol in ethanol sedation assaysData are from w1118 control female (A, C and E)…
42	Figure 4	Expression of mini-w has a negligible impact on ethanol sedation sensitivity and internal ethanol…
43	Figure 5	Nervous system knockdown of mini-w in flies with altered sensitivity to ethanolExpression of v30034…
44	Figure 6	Ethanol sedation sensitivity and internal ethanol concentrations in w null and w wild-type fliesST50…
45	Figure 7	Mutations in and RNAi-mediated knockdown of Clic reduce ethanol sensitivity in ethanol sedation…

Citation	PMID	DOI	Status
Anaka, M et al., J Neurogenet, 2008, The white gene of Drosophila melanogaster encodes a protein with a role in courtship behavior	19012054	10.1080/01677060802309629	Cited
Awofala, AA et al., Journal of Experimental Neuroscience, 2011, The Heat Shock Protein 26 Gene Is Required for Ethanol Tolerance in Drosophila	—	—	—
Bainton, RJ et al., Curr Biol, 2000, Dopamine modulates acute responses to cocaine, nicotine and ethanol in Drosophila	10704411	10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00336-5	Cited
Bellen, HJ et al., Genetics, 2004, The BDGP gene disruption project: single transposon insertions associated with 40% of Drosophila genes	15238527	10.1534/genetics.104.026427	Cited
Bellen, HJ et al., Genetics, 2011, The Drosophila gene disruption project: progress using transposons with distinctive site specificities	21515576	10.1534/genetics.111.126995	Cited
Berger, KH et al., Alcohol Clin Exp Res, 2004, Rapid and chronic: two distinct forms of ethanol tolerance in Drosophila	15597078	10.1097/01.alc.0000141817.15993.98	Cited
Bhandari, P et al., Alcohol Clin Exp Res, 2009, An assay for evoked locomotor behavior in Drosophila reveals a role for integrins in ethanol sensitivity and rapid ethanol tolerance	19645731	10.1111/j.1530-0277.2009.01018.x	Cited
Bhandari, P et al., Genes Brain Behav, 2012, Chloride intracellular channels modulate acute ethanol behaviors in Drosophila, Caenorhabditis elegans and mice	22239914	10.1111/j.1601-183X.2012.00765.x	Cited
Borycz, J et al., J Exp Biol, 2008, Drosophila ABC transporter mutants white, brown and scarlet have altered contents and distribution of biogenic amines in the brain	18931318	10.1242/jeb.021162	Cited
Brand, AH et al., Development, 1993, Targeted gene expression as a means of altering cell fates and generating dominant phenotypes	8223268	10.1242/dev.118.2.401	Cited
Campbell, JL et al., J Neurobiol, 2001, Volatile general anesthetics reveal a neurobiological role for the white and brown genes of Drosophila melanogaster	11745669	10.1002/neu.10009	Cited
Chintapalli, VR et al., Nat Genet, 2007, Using FlyAtlas to identify better Drosophila melanogaster models of human disease	17534367	10.1038/ng2049	Cited
Corl, AB et al., Cell, 2009, Happyhour, a Ste20 family kinase, implicates EGFR signaling in ethanol-induced behaviors	19464045	10.1016/j.cell.2009.03.020	Cited
Corl, AB et al., Nat Neurosci, 2005, Insulin signaling in the nervous system regulates ethanol intoxication in Drosophila melanogaster	15592467	10.1038/nn1363	Cited
Davies, AG et al., Neuron, 2004, Natural variation in the npr-1 gene modifies ethanol responses of wild strains of C. elegans	15182714	10.1016/j.neuron.2004.05.004	Cited
Devineni, AV et al., Fly (Austin), 2011, The genetic relationships between ethanol preference, acute ethanol sensitivity, and ethanol tolerance in Drosophila melanogaster	21750412	10.4161/fly.5.3.16987	Cited
Diegelmann, S et al., Learn Mem, 2006, Genetic dissociation of acquisition and memory strength in the heat-box spatial learning paradigm in Drosophila	16418434	10.1101/lm.45506	Cited
Dietzl, G et al., Nature, 2007, A genome-wide transgenic RNAi library for conditional gene inactivation in Drosophila	17625558	10.1038/nature05954	Cited
Eddison, M et al., Neuron, 2011, arouser reveals a role for synapse number in the regulation of ethanol sensitivity	21658589	10.1016/j.neuron.2011.03.030	Cited
Evans, JM et al., J Exp Biol, 2008, A new role for a classical gene: white transports cyclic GMP	18310115	10.1242/jeb.014837	Cited
Ewart, GD et al., J Biol Chem, 1994, Mutational analysis of the traffic ATPase (ABC) transporters involved in uptake of eye pigment precursors in Drosophila melanogaster. Implications for structure-function relationships	8144619	—	Cited
Ewart, GD et al., Methods Enzymol, 1998, ABC Transporters Involved in Transport of Eye Pigment Precursors in Drosophila melanogaster	9711556	10.1016/s0076-6879(98)92017-1	Cited
Hazelrigg, T et al., Cell, 1984, Transformation of white Locus DNA in Drosophila: Dosage Compensation, zeste Interaction, and Position Effects	6319027	10.1016/0092-8674(84)90240-x	Cited
Hing, AL et al., J Neurobiol, 1996, Male-male courtship behavior induced by ectopic expression of the Drosophila white gene: role of sensory function and age	8844509	10.1002/(SICI)1097-4695(199608)30:4<454::AID-NEU2>3.0.CO;2-2	Cited
Kirov, G et al., Mol Psychiatry, 2001, Screening ABCG1, the human homologue of the Drosophila white gene, for polymorphisms and association with bipolar affective disorder	11673795	10.1038/sj.mp.4000899	Cited
Klemenz, R et al., Nucleic Acids Research, 1987, The white gene as a marker in a new P-element vector for gene transfer in Drosophila	3108854	10.1093/nar/15.10.3947	Cited
Lasek, AW et al., PLoS One, 2011, An evolutionary conserved role for anaplastic lymphoma kinase in behavioral responses to ethanol	21799923	10.1371/journal.pone.0022636	Cited
Lee, HG et al., PLoS One, 2008, Recurring ethanol exposure induces disinhibited courtship in Drosophila	18167550	10.1371/journal.pone.0001391	Cited
Mackenzie, SM et al., Biochim Biophys Acta, 1999, Mutations in the white gene of Drosophila melanogaster affecting ABC transporters that determine eye colouration	10407069	10.1016/s0005-2736(99)00064-4	Cited
Mackenzie, SM et al., Genetica, 2000, Sub-cellular localisation of the white/scarlet ABC transporter to pigment granule membranes within the compound eye of Drosophila melanogaster	11294610	10.1023/a:1004115718597	Cited
Moore, MS et al., Cell, 1998, Ethanol intoxication in Drosophila: Genetic and pharmacological evidence for regulation by the cAMP signaling pathway	9635429	10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81205-2	Cited
Nakamura, M et al., Mol Psychiatry, 1999, Polymorphisms of the human homologue of the Drosophila white gene are associated with mood and panic disorders	10208447	10.1038/sj.mp.4000515	Cited
Nilsson, EE et al., J Neurogenet, 2000, Fruitless is in the regulatory pathway by which ectopic mini-white and transformer induce bisexual courtship in Drosophila	10858821	10.3109/01677060009084495	Cited
Olofsson, B et al., Dev Biol, 2005, Condensation of the central nervous system in embryonic Drosophila is inhibited by blocking hemocyte migration or neural activity	15708571	10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.12.020	Cited
Palmer, RH et al., Drug Alcohol Depend, 2012, The genetics of alcohol dependence: Advancing towards systems-based approaches	22854292	10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.07.005	Cited
Peru y Colon de Portugal, RL et al., Journal of Neuroscience, 2012, Adult Neuronal Arf6 Controls Ethanol-Induced Behavior with Arfaptin Downstream of Rac1 and RhoGAP18B	23223291	10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1944-12.2012	Cited
Pirrotta, V, Biotechnology, 1988, Vectors for P-mediated transformation in Drosophila	2850048	10.1016/b978-0-409-90042-2.50028-3	Cited
Rodan, AR et al., Int Rev Neurobiol, 2010, The genetics of behavioral alcohol responses in Drosophila	20813239	10.1016/S0074-7742(10)91002-7	Cited
Rodan, AR et al., J Neurosci, 2002, Functional dissection of neuroanatomical loci regulating ethanol sensitivity in Drosophila	12417673	10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-21-09490.2002	Cited
Rothenfluh, A et al., Cell, 2006, Distinct behavioral responses to ethanol are regulated by alternate RhoGAP18B isoforms	17018286	10.1016/j.cell.2006.09.010	Cited
Rubin, GM et al., Science, 1982, Genetic transformation of Drosophila with transposable element vectors	6289436	10.1126/science.6289436	Cited
Scholz, H et al., Curr Top Behav Neurosci, 2011, Invertebrate Models of Alcoholism	21472534	10.1007/7854_2011_128	Cited
Scholz, H et al., Nature, 2005, The hangover gene defines a stress pathway required for ethanol tolerance development	16094367	10.1038/nature03864	Cited
Scholz, H et al., Neuron, 2000, Functional ethanol tolerance in Drosophila	11086999	10.1016/s0896-6273(00)00101-x	Cited
Scholz, H, J Neurobiol, 2005, Influence of the biogenic amine tyramine on ethanol-induced behaviors in Drosophila	15729684	10.1002/neu.20127	Cited
Scholz, H, J Neurogenet, 2009, Intoxicated fly brains: neurons mediating ethanol-induced behaviors	19101835	10.1080/01677060802471676	Cited
Schumann, G et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2011, Genome-wide association and genetic functional studies identify autism susceptibility candidate 2 gene (AUTS2) in the regulation of alcohol consumption	21471458	10.1073/pnas.1017288108	Primary
Silicheva, M et al., Nucleic Acids Research, 2010, Drosophila mini-white model system: new insights into positive position effects and the role of transcriptional terminators and gypsy insulator in transgene shielding	19854952	10.1093/nar/gkp877	Cited
Sitaraman, D et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2008, Serotonin is necessary for place memory in Drosophila	18385379	10.1073/pnas.0710168105	Cited
Sordella, R et al., Cell, 2006, Driving Actin Dynamics under the Influence of Alcohol	17018272	10.1016/j.cell.2006.09.017	Cited
Wen, T et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2005, Drosophila neuropeptide F and its receptor, NPFR1, define a signaling pathway that acutely modulates alcohol sensitivity	15677721	10.1073/pnas.0406814102	Cited
Zhang, SD et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1995, Misexpression of the white (w) gene triggers male-male courtship in Drosophila	7777542	10.1073/pnas.92.12.5525	Cited

In this knowledge base

Title	Year	PMID
Genomewide Association Study of Alcohol Dependence Identifies Risk Loci Altering Ethanol-Response Behaviors in Model Organisms.	2017	28226201
Drosophila and Caenorhabditis elegans as Discovery Platforms for Genes Involved in Human Alcohol Use Disorder.	2015	26173477

External

Title	Authors	Journal	Year	Link
More than meets the eye: mutation of the white gene in Drosophila has broad phenotypic and transcriptomic effects.	Rickle A et al.	—	2025	→
Mutation of the <i>white</i> gene in <i>Drosophila</i> has broad phenotypic and transcriptomic effects	Rickle A et al.	—	2025	—
A classic screening marker does not affect antennal electrophysiology but strongly regulates reproductive behaviours in Bactrocera dorsalis.	Wuyun Q et al.	—	2024	→
The function of ethanol in olfactory associative behaviors in Drosophila melanogaster larvae.	Berger M et al.	—	2023	→
Chloride intracellular channel 4 (CLIC4) expression profile in the mouse medial prefrontal cortex and its regulation by ethanol.	Bogenpohl JW et al.	—	2022	→
Corazonin Neurons Contribute to Dimorphic Ethanol Sedation Sensitivity in <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>.	Oyeyinka A et al.	—	2022	→
Identification of additional dye tracers for measuring solid food intake and food preference via consumption-excretion in Drosophila.	Shell BC et al.	—	2022	→
Expansion and application of dye tracers for measuring solid food intake and food preference in Drosophila.	Shell BC et al.	—	2021	→
Mutants of the <i>white</i> ABCG Transporter in <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i> Have Deficient Olfactory Learning and Cholesterol Homeostasis.	Myers JL et al.	—	2021	→
Serotoninergic Modulation of Phototactic Variability Underpins a Bet-Hedging Strategy in <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>.	Krams IA et al.	—	2021	→
Transcriptome analysis of chloride intracellular channel knockdown in Drosophila identifies oxidation-reduction function as possible mechanism of altered sensitivity to ethanol sedation.	Weston RM et al.	—	2021	→
Tyramine synthesis, vesicular packaging, and the SNARE complex function coordinately in astrocytes to regulate Drosophila alcohol sedation.	Lee KM et al.	—	2021	→
Dietary yeast influences ethanol sedation in Drosophila via serotonergic neuron function.	Schmitt RE et al.	—	2020	→
Flying Together: <i>Drosophila</i> as a Tool to Understand the Genetics of Human Alcoholism.	Lathen DR et al.	—	2020	→
Functional divergence of white genes in Henosepilachna vigintioctopunctata revealed by RNA interference.	Xu P et al.	—	2020	→
Investigating Alcohol Behavior and Physiology Using Drosophila melanogaster.	De Nobrega AK et al.	—	2020	→
Pharmacological targeting of the GABA<sub>B</sub> receptor alters Drosophila's behavioural responses to alcohol.	Ranson DC et al.	—	2020	→
Alcohol sedation in adult <i>Drosophila</i> is regulated by <i>Cysteine proteinase-1</i> in cortex glia.	Lee KM et al.	—	2019	→
Automated real-time quantification of group locomotor activity in Drosophila melanogaster.	Scaplen KM et al.	—	2019	→
Convergent Evidence From Humans and Drosophila melanogaster Implicates the Transcription Factor MEF2B/Mef2 in Alcohol Sensitivity.	Schmitt RE et al.	—	2019	→
CRISPR/Cas9-mediated knockout of the eye pigmentation gene white leads to alterations in colour of head spots in the oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis.	Bai X et al.	—	2019	→
G-protein αq gene expression plays a role in alcohol tolerance in <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>.	Aleyakpo B et al.	—	2019	→
Biogenesis of zinc storage granules in <i>Drosophila melanogaster</i>.	Tejeda-Guzmán C et al.	—	2018	→
Cross-species molecular dissection across alcohol behavioral domains.	Farris SP et al.	—	2018	→
Genetics and genomics of alcohol responses in Drosophila.	Park A et al.	—	2017	→
Genomewide Association Study of Alcohol Dependence Identifies Risk Loci Altering Ethanol-Response Behaviors in Model Organisms.	Adkins AE et al.	—	2017	→
<i>Drosophila melanogaster White</i> Mutant <i>w</i><sup><i>1118</i></sup> Undergo Retinal Degeneration.	Ferreiro MJ et al.	—	2017	→
An inexpensive, scalable behavioral assay for measuring ethanol sedation sensitivity and rapid tolerance in Drosophila.	Sandhu S et al.	—	2015	→
Drosophila and Caenorhabditis elegans as Discovery Platforms for Genes Involved in Human Alcohol Use Disorder.	Grotewiel M et al.	—	2015	→