# Modulation of yellow expression contributes to thermal plasticity of female abdominal pigmentation in Drosophila melanogaster

Jean-Michel Gibert, Emmanuèle Mouchel-Vielh, Frédérique Peronnet

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Jean-Michel Gibert, Emmanuèle Mouchel-Vielh, Frédérique Peronnet. Modulation of yellow expression contributes to thermal plasticity of female abdominal pigmentation in Drosophila melanogaster. Scientific Reports, 2017, 7, pp.43370. 10.1038/srep43370. hal-01480286

HAL Id: hal-01480286

https://hal.sorbonne-universite.fr/hal-01480286

Submitted on 1 Mar 2017

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
SCIENTIFIC REPORTS

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

OPEN

# Modulation of yellow expression contributes to thermal plasticity of female abdominal pigmentation in *Drosophila melanogaster*

Received: 18 October 2016

Accepted: 23 January 2017

Published: 23 February 2017

Jean-Michel Gibert, Emmanuèle Mouchel-Vielh & Frédérique Peronnet

Phenotypic plasticity describes the ability of a given genotype to produce distinct phenotypes in different environments. We use the temperature sensitivity of abdominal pigmentation in *Drosophila melanogaster* females as a model to analyse the effect of the environment on development. We reported previously that thermal plasticity of abdominal pigmentation in females involves the pigmentation gene *tan* (*t*). However, the expression of the pigmentation gene *yellow* (*y*) was also modulated by temperature in the abdominal epidermis of pharate females. We investigate here the contribution of *y* to female abdominal pigmentation plasticity. First, we show that *y* is required for the production of black Dopamine-melanin. Then, using *in situ* hybridization, we show that the expression of *y* is strongly modulated by temperature in the abdominal epidermis of pharate females but not in bristles. Interestingly, these two expression patterns are known to be controlled by distinct enhancers. However, the activity of the *y-wing-body* epidermal enhancer only partially mediates the effect of temperature suggesting that additional regulatory sequences are involved. In addition, we show that *y* and *t* co-expression is needed to induce strong black pigmentation indicating that *y* contributes to female abdominal pigmentation plasticity.

Phenotypic plasticity is “the property of a given genotype to produce different phenotypes in response to distinct environmental conditions”¹. This is frequently observed in the wild²,³, and has also major implications in medicine and agricultural sciences. Furthermore, it is thought to facilitate evolution⁴⁻⁷. Indeed, cryptic genetic variations can be revealed by environmental changes. These variations can subsequently be selected, thus contributing to evolution. Although phenotypic plasticity has been described in many animals and plants, its molecular bases are only beginning to be understood. Strikingly, environmental conditions can dramatically affect the transcription and several studies have identified modulated genes involved in the plasticity of particular morphological traits⁸⁻¹¹.

Abdominal pigmentation in Drosophilids represents an attractive model to dissect the molecular bases of phenotypic plasticity as it is sensitive to temperature in many species¹². Abdominal pigmentation of *Drosophila melanogaster* females is darker when they develop at low temperature¹³. This is particularly pronounced in posterior abdominal segments (A5, A6 and A7) (Fig. 1). Plasticity of abdominal pigmentation is likely to have functional consequences as abdominal pigmentation has been linked to thermoregulation and resistance to UV, pathogens or parasites¹³⁻¹⁶. Abdominal pigmentation was also associated to resistance to desiccation¹⁷, but this was not confirmed in a recent study¹⁸. Abdominal pigmentation differs between males and females in several *Drosophila* species and has been used as a model to dissect the genetic bases of sexual dimorphism¹⁹,²⁰. Furthermore, as abdominal pigmentation is highly evolvable²¹, it has been investigated to study the molecular bases of morphological variation within or between species²²⁻²⁹. The genes involved in *Drosophila* abdominal pigmentation are relatively well known, in particular those encoding the enzymes required for the synthesis of cuticle pigments³⁰⁻³³ (Fig. 2). We reported recently that the thermal plasticity of female abdominal pigmentation in *Drosophila melanogaster* involves transcriptional modulation of the pigmentation gene *tan* (*t*)³⁴. This gene encodes a hydrolase implicated in the production of melanin³⁵ (Fig. 2). *t* is seven times more expressed at 18°C than at 29°C in the

Team "Epigenetic control of developmental homeostasis and plasticity", Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS, Biologie du Développement Paris Seine-Institut de Biologie Paris Seine (LBD-IBPS), 75005 Paris, France. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to J.-M.G. (email: Jean-Michel.Gibert@upmc.fr)
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** Plasticity of abdominal cuticle pigmentation upon temperature in females. Abdominal cuticles of *w*<sup>1118</sup> females grown at 18°C or 29°C. Pigmentation is modulated by temperature in particular in the posterior abdomen (A5, A6 and A7) as previously shown<sup>34</sup>.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Synthesis pathway of cuticular pigments. Enzymes are indicated in red. In this representation, black melanin is considered as Dopamine-melanin (see text for experimental justification) and the alternative pathway mentioned by several authors leading to Dopa-melanin is represented in grey. NβAD: N-β-Alanine-Dopamine.</figcaption></figure>

posterior abdominal epidermis of young adult females. Furthermore, genetic experiments showed that *t* plays an essential role in the plasticity of female abdominal pigmentation. However, we also reported that the expression of the pigmentation genes *yellow* (*y*), *ebony* (*e*), *Dopa-decarboxylase* (*Ddc*) and *black* (*b*) was modulated in pharates (late pupae) but more moderately (less than two fold). This modulation of their expression by temperature is consistent with a darker pigmentation at low temperature and likely explains the residual pigmentation plasticity observed in *t* loss-of-function mutants.

We investigate here the contribution of *y* to female abdominal pigmentation plasticity. The *y* gene has been known for a hundred years as it was among the first described *Drosophila melanogaster* mutants<sup>36</sup>. It is required for the production of black melanin and in the absence of *y*, black melanin is replaced by brown melanin (see Fig. 2)<sup>37</sup>. In *Drosophila melanogaster*, *y* is sex-specifically regulated in the posterior abdomen in correlation with the sexual dimorphism of the melanic pattern observed in adults<sup>25</sup>. Furthermore, the evolution of wing or abdominal pigmentation patterns between *Drosophila* species correlates with modifications of *y* spatial expression<sup>27,37–41</sup>. We show here that temperature modulates the spatial expression of *y* in the abdominal epidermis of pharate females in correlation with the modulation of cuticle pigmentation observed in adults. By contrast, *y* expression associated with bristles is not modulated by temperature. *y* is known to be required but not sufficient for black
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** *y* is required for the production of Dopamine-melanin. The posterior abdominal segments of *Drosophila melanogaster* males (A5 and A6) are black (a). In *y*<sup>1</sup> mutant males, the black pigment is lost and only brown pigment is visible (b). Dorsal down-regulation of *Ddc* using *pnr*-Gal4 to drive an UAS-*RNAi-Ddc* transgene in males leads to loss of both black and brown pigments (c).</figcaption></figure>

melanin production³⁷. Our data indicate that this black melanin is Dopamine-melanin and not Dopa-melanin. Furthermore, we show that combined over-expression of *y* and *t* at 29 °C is necessary and sufficient to reproduce the black phenotype observed at 18 °C. Thus, the stronger expression of *y* at 18 °C contributes to thermal plasticity of female abdominal pigmentation.

## Results

**yellow is required for the production of Dopamine-melanin.** There is a relative uncertainty in the literature on the nature of the black pigment found in the abdominal cuticle of *Drosophila* when *y* is functional. Indeed, as Yellow is related to two other enzymes, Yellow-f and Yellow-f2, which can use as substrate Dopachrome with a higher efficiency than Dopamine-chrome³³, some authors have proposed that the black pigment in abdominal cuticle was Dopa-melanin produced from Dopa²¹,²² (Fig. 2). However, incubation of abdominal cuticles or wings of unpigmented pharates with Dopamine is sufficient to produce black pigment, which suggests that this black pigment is produced from Dopamine and is therefore Dopamine-melanin³⁰,³². We reasoned that if the black pigment of cuticle were Dopa-melanin, the inactivation of *Ddc* should leave it unaffected (Fig. 2). On the opposite, if black pigment were Dopamine-melanin, the inactivation of *Ddc* should lead to loss of black and brown pigments. We therefore took advantage of the Gal4/UAS system to down-regulate the expression of *Ddc* in the dorsal abdominal epidermis of males using a *Ddc* RNAi transgene⁴² and the *pannier-Gal4* driver (*pnr-Gal4*) (Fig. 3). As *pnr* is expressed only in the dorso-central region of the body⁴³, the lateral regions can be used as internal controls. We chose males because of their characteristic black pigmentation in abdominal segments A5 and A6 (Fig. 3a), which is well known to require *y* (Fig. 3b). We observed that *Ddc* down-regulation leads to a complete loss of black and brown pigments (Fig. 3c). We therefore concluded that the black pigment is Dopamine-melanin and not Dopa-melanin.

**Temperature modulates the spatio-temporal expression of *y* in abdominal epidermis.** We showed previously by RT-qPCR that *y* expression is modulated by temperature in the epidermis of abdominal segments A5, A6 and A7 in female pharates (1.97 fold more expressed at 18 °C than at 29 °C)³⁴. In order to analyse the spatial expression of *y*, we performed *in situ* hybridization of female pharates grown at 18 °C or 29 °C. We could distinguish three stages of *y* expression (A, B and C) based on the degree of maturation of abdominal bristles (Fig. 4). These stages correspond approximately to a transition from stage P11(i) to stage P12(ii) as described by Bainbridge and Bownes with morphological markers at 25 °C⁴⁴.

In stage A pharates, two cells at the base of bristles expressed *y*. This expression had a similar intensity when pharates were raised at 18 °C and at 29 °C. These two cells are likely to be the socket and the shaft, the only pigmented cells of the bristle organ. In addition, *y* was expressed in the posterior region of each tergite in segments A2 to A6. This expression was much broader and stronger in pharates grown at 18 °C compared to 29 °C. In A6, *y* was expressed in the whole tergite at 18 °C, and only in the posterior region of the tergite at 29 °C. In A7, at 18 °C, the whole tergite expressed *y* at a high level, whereas it was much weaker at 29 °C.

In stage B pharates, *y* expression was reduced in the socket and the shaft, while the bristle began to be pigmented. Furthermore, *y* was still more expressed in the abdominal epidermis of pharates grown at 18 °C than at 29 °C.

In stage C pharates, *y* was no longer expressed at the base of bristles and the bristles were almost fully pigmented. Furthermore, its overall expression in tergites was reduced compared to stage B and more similar between pharates grown at 18 °C and 29 °C.
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4.** Temperature modulates the spatio-temporal expression of *y* in female pharates. *y* *in situ* hybridization in the abdomen of *w*<sup>1118</sup> female pharates (stage A,B and C) grown at 18 °C or 29 °C. Cuticles were cut next to the dorsal midline. When the cut was made more distantly, the dorsal midline is indicated by a dashed line in the preparations. Small frames in each picture show the staining associated with bristles at a higher magnification.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 5. Effect of temperature on the activity of y wing-body-enhancer.** Top: abdominal epidermis of *y-wing-body-nEGFP* transgenic females grown at 18°C or 29°C. The hemi-tergites A5, A6 and A7 used for nEGFP quantification have been circled with white dashed lines. Representative pictures are shown. Bottom: quantification of nEGFP. ***p < 0.001 (n = 10 for each temperature). Exact p-values: A5 p = 2.73E-5; A6 p = 0.43; A7 p = 3.24E-4.</figcaption></figure>

Therefore, these data showed that temperature modulates the expression of *y* in stages A and B pharates, *i.e.* when its expression is the highest (corresponding approximately to stages P11(i) to P12(i)⁴⁴).

**The temperature sensitivity of *y* is only partially mediated by the *y-wing-body* enhancer.**

Expression of *y* in wings and abdominal epidermis was shown to be controlled by an enhancer called *y-wing-body* located within the 3 kb upstream of *y* transcription start site²⁵. We used the transgenic line *y-wing-body-nEGFP* (nuclear Enhanced Green Fluorescent Protein) to test the effect of temperature on the activity of this enhancer (Fig. 5). Unexpectedly, nEGFP was more expressed at 29 °C than at 18 °C in A5. Furthermore, no difference was detected in A6. However, in A7, nEGFP was more expressed at 18 °C than at 29 °C (1.72 fold). In conclusion, nEGFP expression mimicked *y* expression only in A7.

**y and t co-overexpression at 29°C is sufficient to reproduce the phenotype observed at 18°C.** *y* is required but not sufficient for production of black pigment³⁷. Indeed, *y* gain-of-function must be combined to *e* down-regulation or *t* up-regulation to induce a fully black pigmentation²⁴,³⁷. In order to test whether the strong expression of *y* *n* *t* is sufficient to explain the black pigmentation observed at 18 °C, we increased their expression in abdominal epidermis at 29 °C to mimic the effect of lower temperature. We compared the cuticles of wild-type females and females over-expressing either *y* (*pnr-Gal4/UAS-y*), *t* (*UAS-t/+; pnr-Gal4/+*) or both *y* and *t* (*UAS-t/+; UAS-y/pnr-Gal4*) at 29 °C (Fig. 6). As previously described, *y* over-expression did not change pigmentation whereas *t* over-expression induced dark pigmentation in the anterior region of the tergites²²,³⁷. However, careful examination revealed that this ectopic pigmentation was not as dark as the normal pigmentation
<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 6.** *y* and *t* combined over-expression at 29°C is sufficient to mimic the pigmentation phenotype observed at 18°C. Abdominal cuticle phenotypes of wild-type females, females over-expressing *y* (*UAS-y/*pnr-Gal4*), females over-expressing *t* (*UAS-*t*/+; *pnr-Gal4/+*) and females over-expressing both *y* and *t* (*UAS-*t/+; *UAS-y/*pnr-Gal4*), grown at 29°C. The domain of *pnr* expression is located to the right of the dashed line. Over-expression of *y* is not sufficient to induce the production of black pigment. Over-expression of *t* induces dark pigmentation but pigmentation in the anterior part of the tergites (ectopic pigmentation induced by *pnr*) is lighter than in the posterior part of the tergites (orthotopic plus ectopic pigmentation). By contrast, combined over-expression of *t* and *y* leads to strong and uniform black pigmentation.</figcaption></figure>

in the posterior region of the tergites. This was more visible in A4 and A5 segments. By contrast, when both *y* and *t* were over-expressed in the dorsal region of the abdomen, the anterior region of the tergites was as black as the posterior border of the tergites. Thus, these data show that *y* and *t* combined over-expression at 29°C is necessary and sufficient to reproduce the pigmentation phenotype observed at low temperature.

Discussion

In *Drosophila*, *y* is required for the production of black pigment that we demonstrate here to be Dopamine-melanin. This identification of *Drosophila* black pigment as Dopamine-melanin is in agreement with recent studies analysing the effect of RNAi against *Ddc* on melanin production in other insects⁴⁵,⁴⁶. The diversification of wing or abdomen pigmentation patterns during *Drosophila* evolution was shown to correlate with the modification of *y* expression through changes of either *cis*-regulatory sequences or *trans*-regulators(s)²⁷,³⁷⁻⁴¹. We provide here a detailed description of *y* expression in the abdomen of female pharates grown at 18°C and 29°C. We show that temperature modulates the spatio-temporal expression of *y* in the abdominal epidermis of pharates in correlation with the pigmentation pattern observed in adults. Interestingly, expression of *y* in bristle cells is not modulated by temperature. The expression of *y* in bristle cells and in abdominal epidermis is known to be regulated by distinct *cis*-regulatory sequences. In bristle cells, *y* is controlled by an enhancer located in the large intron, whereas in abdominal epidermis it is controlled by the *y-wing-body* enhancer²⁵,⁴⁷. The regulatory sequences that control *y* expression in bristle cells are likely to be very constrained as they are found in this intron in 6 *Drosophila* species, whereas those that control *y* expression in the abdominal epidermis are more flexible as they have changed location between these species⁴⁷. Thus, the evolutionary flexibility of *y* regulatory sequences and the temperature sensitivity of *y* expression might be related.

Our results show that temperature sensitive expression of *y* in the epidermis of A7 is mediated at least partly by the *y-wing-body* enhancer, demonstrating that regulation of *y* by temperature occurs at the level of transcription. However, this enhancer does not confer temperature sensitivity to *y* expression in the other segments. The fact that we observed the plastic response in A7 (nEGFP signal 1.72 fold stronger at 18°C than 29°C, similarly as the 1.97 fold difference of expression of *y* previously measured by RT-qPCR) is not in favour of a lack of sensitivity of the method. We cannot exclude that genomic sequences flanking the insertion site of the transgene influence the activity of the enhancer and reduce the effect of temperature on its activity specifically in A5 and A6. However,
this could also indicate that other regulatory sequences than the *y-wing-body* enhancer, located in the vicinity of the endogenous *y* locus, participate or condition the sensitivity of *y* transcription to temperature. Interestingly, *y* maps close to the telomere of the X chromosome, a region with particular properties such as reduced recombination rate and low genetic variation⁴⁸. Furthermore, *y* is juxtaposed to a binding site for the insulator protein Su(Hw) which separates it from the *achaete-scute* complex⁴⁹. The sensitivity of *y* transcription to temperature changes might therefore be influenced by telomeric chromatin and/or by this insulator. Deciphering these effects would require to manipulate the endogenous *y* locus. Alternatively, upstream regulators of *y* might be themselves temperature sensitive. It would be interesting to identify such factors and find out whether they also regulate other pigmentation genes notably *t* or *e*. Indeed, a recent study identified several transcription factors involved in the regulation (at least indirect) of both *t* and *e*⁵⁰. Lastly, temperature sensitivity of an enhancer was shown to result from a particular arrangement of binding sites for transcriptional regulators⁵¹. Hence, another hypothesis would be that the architecture of the *y-wing-body* enhancer itself explains its temperature sensitive activity.

Down-regulation of *e* is required to see the effect of *y* over-expression indicating that *y* is not sufficient for black pigment production³⁷. We have shown previously that *e* is slightly less expressed at 18 °C than at 29 °C in the anterior abdominal segments of young adult females³⁴. Thus, the broader expression of *y* in combination with the lower expression of *e* might contribute to the weak but distinguishable enhancement of black pigment production at 18°C in anterior tergites.

In posterior abdominal segments, dramatic modulation of *t* expression by temperature is essential for thermal plasticity of pigmentation in females³⁴. However, as overexpression at 29°C of both *y* and *t*, but not the one of *t* alone, is necessary and sufficient to reproduce the black pigmentation phenotype observed at 18°C, we can conclude that modulation of *y* expression by temperature also contributes to thermal plasticity of pigmentation in the posterior abdominal segments of females.

Our results are remarkably similar to those obtained in the lepidopteran *Junonia coenia*, a species with contrasting seasonal morphs¹⁰. Spring and autumn morphs have markedly different wing pigmentation patterns. In this butterfly, environmental conditions dramatically modulate the expression of *t* in late pupal stage and *y* in earlier pupal stage. Phenotypic plasticity of pigmentation in insects appears therefore to be a complex process based on transcriptional modulation of multiple pigmentation genes at distinct developmental stages corresponding to their peak of expression. A few of them, such as *t*, play a paramount role whereas others, like *y*, have a more modest contribution.

## Methods

**Fly stocks.** We used a w¹¹¹⁸ inbred line as wild-type. The *y* allele used was y¹. The UAS-*t* line was a gift of Dr Nicolas Gompel. The *y-wing-body-nEGFP* line was from the lab of Sean Carroll. The *pnr-Gal4* (BL3039) and *UAS-y* (BL3043) lines were from the Bloomington stock centre. The *UAS-RNAi-Ddc* (GD3329) line was from the VDRC stock centre (Vienna, Austria).

**Cuticle preparations.** Adult flies between 3 and 5 days old were stored for 8 days in ethanol 75% before dissection. Abdominal cuticles were cut just beyond the dorsal midline. After dissection, cuticles were rehydrated in PBS-glycerol for 4 hrs. They were then mounted in Hoyer's medium.

For nEGFP observations, abdomens were dissected in PBS, fixed 20 minutes in 3.7% paraformaldehyde in PBS, washed twice 10 minutes in PBS and mounted in Mowiol.

**In situ hybridization.** A 822 bp *y* fragment was amplified by PCR with primers 5'–TGACTTGACCACGG ATACGC-3' and 5'–GGTGGACCCATTGGCAAAAC-3' from cDNAs previously prepared from pupal abdominal epidermis³⁴. This PCR fragment was cloned by Topo-Cloning and LR-Recombination (Gateway) in pBlueScript vector (Invitrogen). We used two clones where the *y* fragments were inserted in opposite directions so that sense and antisense Digoxygenin-labeled probes could be synthesized with the same RNA polymerase (T7, Roche) after linearization of the plasmids. *In situ* hybridizations were performed according to the Carroll's lab protocol (http://carroll.molbio.wisc.edu). Precisely, we followed the protocole “*in situ* hybridization on adult abdomen” modified from the Mark Rebeiz's one by Héloïse D. Dufour. Specificity of the antisense probe was assessed by comparison with signal from the sense probe (Figure S1). Morphological markers (wing color, degree of maturation of abdominal bristles, localization of meconium in the abdomen) were used to stage pharates and collect them at a similar developmental stage whether grown at 18 °C or 29 °C⁴⁴. *In situ* hybridization experiments were performed twice, on individuals grown at 18 °C or 29 °C (between 10 and 20 individuals for each temperature). Staining was stopped after 90 minutes and 80 minutes for the first and the second experiment respectively. Similar results were obtained in each experiment. Representative pictures from the first *in situ* hybridization are shown in Fig. 4.

**Image acquisition.** Adult cuticles and abdominal *in situ* hybridizations were imaged with a binocular equipped with Leica DC480 digital camera using the *Leica IM50 Image Manager* software. An annular lamp was used to ensure homogeneous lighting. Care was taken to use identical settings in each set of experiments. The higher magnification pictures showing *y* expression associated with bristles as well as abdominal epidermes of *y-body-nEGFP* pharates were acquired using a micro-apotome (Zeiss). nEGFP was measured in hemi-tergites A5, A6 and A7 using maximum intensity projections of stacks of 14 to 16 pictures (39 to 45 µm thick) using the *Zen* software.
**Statistical analysis.** The effect of temperature on *n*EGFP expression in A5, A6 and A7 was tested by a t-test. Homogeneity of variances was previously checked using a Levene test and the appropriate option of the t-test was used (homo- or heteroscedasticity).

References

1. Pigliucci, M. *Phenotypic Plasticity, Beyond Nature and Nurture*. (2001).

2. West-Eberhard, M. J. *Developmental plasticity and evolution*. (Oxford University Press, 2003).

3. Gilbert, S. & Epel, D. *Ecological Developmental Biology: Integrating Epigenetics, Medecine, and Evolution*. (Sinauer Associates, 2008).

4. Espinosa-Soto, C., Martin, O. C. & Wagner, A. Phenotypic plasticity can facilitate adaptive evolution in gene regulatory circuits. *BMC Evol Biol* **11**, 5 (2011).

5. Fierst, J. L. A history of phenotypic plasticity accelerates adaptation to a new environment. *J Evol Biol* **24**, 1992–2001 (2011).

6. Moczek, A. P. et al. The role of developmental plasticity in evolutionary innovation. *Proc Biol Sci*, doi: 10.1098/rspb.2011.0971 (2011).

7. West-Eberhard, M. J. Developmental plasticity and the origin of species differences. *Proc Natl Acad Sci UA* **102** Suppl 1, 6543–9 (2005).

8. Zhou, S., Campbell, T. G., Stone, E. A., Mackay, T. F. & Anholt, R. R. Phenotypic plasticity of the Drosophila transcriptome. *PLoS Genet* **8**, e1002593 (2012).

9. Schneider, R. F., Li, Y., Meyer, A. & Gunter, H. M. Regulatory gene networks that shape the development of adaptive phenotypic plasticity in a cichlid fish. *Mol. Ecol* **23**, 4511–4526 (2014).

10. Daniels, E. V., Murad, R., Mortazavi, A. & Reed, R. D. Extensive transcriptional response associated with seasonal plasticity of butterfly wing patterns. *Mol Ecol*, doi: 10.1111/mec.12988 (2014).

11. Runcie, D. E. et al. Genetics of gene expression responses to temperature stress in a sea urchin gene network. *Mol Ecol* **21**, 4547–62 (2012).

12. Parkash, R., Ramniwas, S., Lambhod, C. & Kajla, B. Adaptive changes in the plasticity of body melanisation in generalist, cold and warm adapted Drosophila species. *Acta Entomol. Sin.* **54**, 1155–64 (2011).

13. Gibert, P., Moreteau, B. & David, J. R. Developmental constraints on an adaptive plasticity: reaction norms of pigmentation in adult segments of *Drosophila melanogaster*. *Evol Dev* **2**, 249–60 (2000).

14. Bastide, H., Yassin, A., Johanning, E. J. & Pool, J. E. Pigmentation in *Drosophila melanogaster* reaches its maximum in Ethiopia and correlates most strongly with ultra-violet radiation in sub-Saharan Africa. *BMC Evol Biol* **14**, 179 (2014).

15. Dombeck, I. & Jaenike, J. Ecological genetics of abdominal pigmentation in Drosophila falleni: a pleiotropic link to nematode parasitism. *Evolution* **58**, 587–96 (2004).

16. Kutch, I. C., Sevgili, H., Wittman, T. & Fedorka, K. M. Thermoregulatory strategy may shape immune investment in *Drosophila melanogaster*. *J Exp Biol* **217**, 3664–9 (2014).

17. Parkash, R., Rajpurohit, S. & Ramniwas, S. Impact of darker, intermediate and lighter phenotypes of body melanization on desiccation resistance in *Drosophila melanogaster*. *J Insect Sci* **9**, 1–10 (2009).

18. Rajpurohit, S., Peterson, L. M., Orr, A. J., Marlon, A. J. & Gibbs, A. G. An Experimental Evolution Test of the Relationship between Melanism and Desiccation Survival in Insects. *PLoS One* **11**, e0163414 (2016).

19. Kopp, A., Duncan, I., Godt, D. & Carroll, S. B. Genetic control and evolution of sexually dimorphic characters in Drosophila. *Nature* **408**, 553–9 (2000).

20. Williams, T. M. et al. The regulation and evolution of a genetic switch controlling sexually dimorphic traits in Drosophila. *Cell* **134**, 610–23 (2008).

21. Wittkopp, P. J., Carroll, S. B. & Kopp, A. Evolution in black and white: genetic control of pigment patterns in Drosophila. *Trends Genet* **19**, 495–504 (2003).

22. Wittkopp, P. J. et al. Intraspecific polymorphism to interspecific divergence: genetics of pigmentation in Drosophila. *Science* **326**, 540–4 (2009).

23. Rebeiz, M., Pool, J. E., Kassner, V. A., Aquadro, C. F. & Carroll, S. B. Stepwise modification of a modular enhancer underlies adaptation in a Drosophila population. *Science* **326**, 1663–7 (2009).

24. Jeong, S. et al. The evolution of gene regulation underlies a morphological difference between two Drosophila sister species. *Cell* **132**, 783–93 (2008).

25. Jeong, S., Rokas, A. & Carroll, S. B. Regulation of body pigmentation by the Abdominal-B Hox protein and its gain and loss in Drosophila evolution. *Cell* **125**, 1387–99 (2006).

26. Rogers, W. A. et al. Recurrent modification of a conserved cis-regulatory element underlies fruit fly pigmentation diversity. *PLoS Genet* **9**, e1003740 (2013).

27. Camino, E. M. et al. The evolutionary origination and diversification of a dimorphic gene regulatory network through parallel innovations in cis and trans. *PLoS Genet.* **11**, e1005136 (2015).

28. Bastide, H. et al. A Genome-Wide, Fine-Scale Map of Natural Pigmentation Variation in *Drosophila melanogaster*. *PLoS Genet* **9**, e1003534 (2013).

29. Dembeck, L. M. et al. Genetic Architecture of Abdominal Pigmentation in *Drosophila melanogaster*. *PLoS Genet.* **11**, e1005163 (2015).

30. Riedel, F., Vorkel, D. & Eaton, S. Megalin-dependent yellow endocytosis restricts melanization in the Drosophila cuticle. *Development* **138**, 149–58 (2011).

31. Massey, J. H. & Wittkopp, P. J. The Genetic Basis of Pigmentation Differences Within and Between Drosophila Species. *Curr. Top. Dev. Biol.* **119**, 27–61 (2016).

32. Walter, M. F. *et al.* Catecholamine metabolism and *in vitro* induction of premature cuticle melanization in wild type and pigmentation mutants of *Drosophila melanogaster*. *Arch Insect Biochem Physiol* **31**, 219–33 (1996).

33. Han, Q. *et al.* Identification of *Drosophila melanogaster* yellow-f and yellow-f2 proteins as dopachrome-conversion enzymes. *Biochem J* **368**, 333–40 (2002).

34. Gibert, J.-M., Mouchel-Vielh, E., De Castro, S. & Peronnet, F. Phenotypic Plasticity through Transcriptional Regulation of the Evolutionary Hotspot Gene tan in *Drosophila melanogaster*. *PLoS Genet.* **12**, e1006218 (2016).

35. True, J. R. *et al.* Drosophila tan Encodes a Novel Hydrolase Required in Pigmentation and Vision. *PLoS Genet* **1**, e63 (2005).

36. Morgan, T. J. & Bridges, C. B. Sex-linked inheritance in Drosophila. *Publs Carnegie Inst* 1–88 (1916).

37. Wittkopp, P. J., True, J. R. & Carroll, S. B. Reciprocal functions of the Drosophila yellow and ebony proteins in the development and evolution of pigment patterns. *Development* **129**, 1849–58 (2002).

38. Wittkopp, P. J., Vaccaro, K. & Carroll, S. B. Evolution of yellow gene regulation and pigmentation in Drosophila. *Curr Biol* **12**, 1547–56 (2002).

39. Gompel, N., Prud'homme, B., Wittkopp, P. J., Kassner, V. A. & Carroll, S. B. Chance caught on the wing: cis-regulatory evolution and the origin of pigment patterns in Drosophila. *Nature* **433**, 481–7 (2005).

40. Ordway, A. J., Hancuch, K. N., Johnson, W., Williams, T. M. & Rebeiz, M. The expansion of body coloration involves coordinated evolution in cis and trans within the pigmentation regulatory network of Drosophila prostipennis. *Dev Biol* **392**, 431–40 (2014).
41. Arnoult, L. et al. Emergence and diversification of fly pigmentation through evolution of a gene regulatory module. *Science* **339**, 1423–6 (2013).

42. Dietzl, G. et al. A genome-wide transgenic RNAi library for conditional gene inactivation in Drosophila. *Nature* **448**, 151–6 (2007).

43. Calleja, M. et al. Generation of medial and lateral dorsal body domains by the pannier gene of Drosophila. *Development* **127**, 3971–80 (2000).

44. Bainbridge, S. P. & Bownes, M. Staging the metamorphosis of *Drosophila melanogaster*. *J Embryol Exp Morphol* **66**, 57–80 (1981).

45. Liu, J., Lemonds, T. R. & Popadić, A. The genetic control of aposematic black pigmentation in hemimetabolous insects: insights from Oncopeltus fasciatus. *Evol. Dev.* **16**, 270–277 (2014).

46. Lemonds, T. R., Liu, J. & Popadić, A. The contribution of the melanin pathway to overall body pigmentation during ontogenesis of Periplaneta americana. *Insect Sci*, doi: 10.1111/1744-7917.12356 (2016).

47. Kalay, G. & Wittkopp, P. J. Nomadic Enhancers: Tissue-Specific cis-Regulatory Elements of *yellow* Have Divergent Genomic Positions among Drosophila Species. *PLoS Genet.* **6**, e1001222 (2010).

48. Munté, A., Aguadé, M. & Segarra, C. Divergence of the *yellow* gene between *Drosophila melanogaster* and *D. subobscura*: recombination rate, codon bias and synonymous substitutions. *Genetics* **147**, 165–175 (1997).

49. Golovnin, A. et al. An endogenous Su(Hw) insulator separates the *yellow* gene from the Achaete-scute gene complex in Drosophila. *Dev. Camb. Engl.* **130**, 3249–3258 (2003).

50. Rogers, W. A. et al. A survey of the trans-regulatory landscape for *Drosophila melanogaster* abdominal pigmentation. *Dev Biol*, doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2013.11.013 (2013).

51. Crocker, J. et al. Low affinity binding site clusters confer hox specificity and regulatory robustness. *Cell* **160**, 191–203 (2015).

## Acknowledgements

Flybase provided information useful for this study. We thank the Bloomington Drosophila stock centre and the Vienna Drosophila Resource Centre for fly stocks. We thank Dr Héloïse D. Dufour for the *y-wing-body-nEGFP* stock and Dr Nicolas Gompel for the *UAS-tan* stock. We thank other members of the lab for fruitful discussions.

## Author Contributions

J.M.G. designed the study and performed the experiments. J.M.G., E.M.V. and F.P. analysed the data and wrote the paper.

## Additional Information

**Supplementary information** accompanies this paper at http://www.nature.com/srep

**Competing financial interests:** The authors declare no competing financial interests.

**How to cite this article:** Gibert, J.-M. et al. Modulation of *yellow* expression contributes to thermal plasticity of female abdominal pigmentation in *Drosophila melanogaster*. *Sci. Rep.* **7**, 43370; doi: 10.1038/srep43370 (2017).

**Publisher's note:** Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

© The Author(s) 2017