| Literature DB >> 27065825 |
Nicholas B Angstman1, Hans-Georg Frank1, Christoph Schmitz1.
Abstract
As a widely used and studied model organism, Caenorhabditis elegans worms offer the ability to investigate implications of behavioral change. Although, investigation of C. elegans behavioral traits has been shown, analysis is often narrowed down to measurements based off a single point, and thus cannot pick up on subtle behavioral and morphological changes. In the present study videos were captured of four different C. elegans strains grown in liquid cultures and transferred to NGM-agar plates with an E. coli lawn or with no lawn. Using an advanced software, WormLab, the full skeleton and outline of worms were tracked to determine whether the presence of food affects behavioral traits. In all seven investigated parameters, statistically significant differences were found in worm behavior between those moving on NGM-agar plates with an E. coli lawn and NGM-agar plates with no lawn. Furthermore, multiple test groups showed differences in interaction between variables as the parameters that significantly correlated statistically with speed of locomotion varied. In the present study, we demonstrate the validity of a model to analyze C. elegans behavior beyond simple speed of locomotion. The need to account for a nested design while performing statistical analyses in similar studies is also demonstrated. With extended analyses, C. elegans behavioral change can be investigated with greater sensitivity, which could have wide utility in fields such as, but not limited to, toxicology, drug discovery, and RNAi screening.Entities:
Keywords: C. elegans; E. coli; food; locomotion; tracking
Year: 2016 PMID: 27065825 PMCID: PMC4814519 DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00060
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Behav Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5153 Impact factor: 3.558
Summary of .
| Single/Multiple worms | Single | Multiple | Multiple | Single | Single | Multiple | Single | Single | Multiple |
| Tracking capability | Skeleton and outline | Mid-point | Mid-point | Skeleton and outline | Skeleton and outline | Skeleton and outline | Bright spot | Skeleton and outline | Skeleton and outline |
Tsibidis and Tavernarakis, 2007;
Ramot et al., 2008;
Ramot et al., 2008;
Stirman et al., 2011;
Leifer et al., 2011;
Swierczek et al., 2011;
Faumont et al., 2011;
Geng et al., 2004;
Roussel et al., .
Figure 1Representative images of . The panels show unprocessed frames of videos of wild type (N2) C. elegans on NGM-agar plates with an E. coli lawn (A) or with no lawn (B). The insets show individual worms (indicated by arrows) at higher magnification. The slightly uneven illumination of the panels stems from the fact that in the experimental setup of the present study, the field-of-view was placed offset from the middle of the agar plates. However, this had no impact on unequivocal identification and tracking of the worms on the plates (evaluation data not shown).
Figure 2WormLab advanced analyses. (A) Bending angle (Θ) was measured as the supplement of the angle between the head, mid-point, and tail. Worms with head, mid-point, and tail in line have an angle of zero. (B) Omega bending is indicated when the angle (Θ) created between the head, mid-point, and tail is < 90° (i.e., the bending angle is >90°). (C) Wavelength was measured as two times the distance between the positive (P) and negative (N) stationary points.
Summary of analyses and comparison between .
| Average speed (μm/s) | N2 | 128.6 | 41.6 | 146.9 | 55.3 | 1 | 19.324 | 4.4 | 18 | 325 | 2.394 | ||
| 110.8 | 39.6 | 130.4 | 49.0 | 1 | 10.226 | 5.2 | 10 | 336 | 3.679 | ||||
| 119.2 | 53.5 | 83.4 | 46.0 | 1 | 10.467 | 17.5 | 10 | 259 | 1.814 | 0.058 | |||
| 165.9 | 182.4 | 182.4 | 62.7 | 1 | 10.551 | 2.5 | 0.140 | 10 | 298 | 2.129 | |||
| Average Angle (°) | N2 | 34.3 | 14.2 | 40.0 | 17.1 | 1 | 19.387 | 6.3 | 18 | 325 | 2.287 | ||
| 25.0 | 12.7 | 44.8 | 20.5 | 1 | 10.248 | 38.0 | 10 | 336 | 3.359 | ||||
| 28.2 | 12.1 | 48.9 | 24.3 | 1 | 11.108 | 98.6 | 10 | 259 | 0.776 | 0.652 | |||
| 26.7 | 11.1 | 36.1 | 17.7 | 1 | 12.138 | 42.5 | 10 | 298 | 0.568 | 0.840 | |||
| St. Dev. Angle (°) | N2 | 24.3 | 9.5 | 29.1 | 12.1 | 1 | 20.047 | 11.3 | 18 | 325 | 1.562 | 0.068 | |
| 17.4 | 8.7 | 31.1 | 13.1 | 1 | 10.367 | 59.5 | 10 | 336 | 2.272 | ||||
| 21.4 | 10.8 | 33.0 | 14.9 | 1 | 10.676 | 47.6 | 10 | 259 | 1.261 | 0.253 | |||
| 18.1 | 6.6 | 25.6 | 12.7 | 1 | 11.453 | 36.9 | 10 | 298 | 0.824 | 0.606 | |||
| Average wavelength (μm) | N2 | 383.0 | 42.7 | 347.5 | 43.9 | 1 | 19.931 | 36.9 | 18 | 325 | 1.653 | ||
| 363.2 | 52.0 | 330.0 | 53.3 | 1 | 10.398 | 15.7 | 10 | 336 | 2.097 | ||||
| 346.1 | 70.2 | 318.2 | 67.3 | 1 | 10.580 | 6.3 | 10 | 259 | 1.465 | 0.153 | |||
| 411.3 | 45.2 | 371.8 | 60.9 | 1 | 10.819 | 29.0 | 10 | 298 | 1.441 | 0.161 | |||
| St. Dev. wavelength (μm) | N2 | 103.3 | 31.3 | 91.8 | 34.3 | 1 | 19.533 | 4.6 | 18 | 325 | 2.073 | ||
| 103.4 | 33.4 | 90.9 | 30.8 | 1 | 10.419 | 6.8 | 10 | 336 | 1.996 | ||||
| 85.0 | 31.6 | 99.3 | 37.8 | 1 | 10.451 | 6.6 | 10 | 259 | 1.880 | ||||
| 93.1 | 31.9 | 86.1 | 35.4 | 1 | 10.803 | 3.1 | 0.108 | 10 | 298 | 1.468 | 0.150 | ||
| Omega bending percent | N2 | 2.25 | 7.69 | 3.99 | 8.82 | 1 | 20.413 | 3.7 | 0.069 | 18 | 325 | 1.331 | 0.166 |
| 0.82 | 4.08 | 7.31 | 11.61 | 1 | 10.440 | 27.1 | 10 | 336 | 1.900 | ||||
| 1.09 | 3.48 | 8.89 | 15.76 | 1 | 17.234 | 172.5 | 10 | 259 | 0.133 | 0.999 | |||
| 0.08 | 0.75 | 3.00 | 9.12 | 1 | 11.394 | 9.0 | 10 | 298 | 0.857 | 0.574 | |||
| Reversal percent | N2 | 2.90 | 6.59 | 5.88 | 10.44 | 1 | 21.214 | 8.7 | 18 | 325 | 1.008 | 0.449 | |
| 3.19 | 8.01 | 14.57 | 14.77 | 1 | 10.259 | 28.3 | 10 | 336 | 3.215 | ||||
| 8.22 | 12.22 | 21.63 | 13.23 | 1 | 10.566 | 49.7 | 10 | 259 | 1.501 | 0.139 | |||
| 2.24 | 6.77 | 4.68 | 10.41 | 1 | 11.830 | 8.4 | 10 | 298 | 0.659 | 0.762 | |||
P-values smaller than 0.05 are given boldface.
Figure 3Speed of locomotion of N2 (wild type) . Groups A1–A10 and B1–B10 show individual data (green dots) and mean ± standard deviation (red lines) of speed of locomotion of N2 worms on 10 plates with an E. coli lawn (Groups A1–A10) and on 10 plates with no lawn (Groups B1–B10). Groups A and B show Tukey boxplots of the speed of locomotion of all worms on plates with an E. coli lawn (Group A) and of all worms on plates with no lawn (Group B). Nested ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference between worms on plates with an E. coli lawn and worms on plates with no lawn (p = 0.049) as well as a statistically significant effect among plates (p = 0.001; see also Table 2).
Summary of correlation between analyses for worms on plates with an .
| Average speed vs. average angle | N2 | 72 | 100 | 0.917 | 0.030 | 5.277 | |||
| 74 | 115 | 0.242 | 0.093 | 19.11 | < | ||||
| 55 | 77 | 0.315 | 0.01949 | 2.585 | 0.110 | ||||
| 56 | 73 | 0.508 | 0.232 | 38.43 | < | ||||
| Average speed vs. St. Dev. angle | N2 | 76 | 96 | 0.810 | 0.001 | 0.232 | 0.631 | ||
| 74 | 115 | 0.699 | 0.014 | 2.697 | 0.102 | ||||
| 52 | 80 | 0.792 | 0.002 | 0.310 | 0.579 | ||||
| 62 | 67 | 0.766 | 0.014 | 1.824 | 0.179 | ||||
| Average speed vs. average wavelength | N2 | 83 | 89 | 0.129 | 0.006 | 1.042 | 0.309 | ||
| 98 | 91 | 0.962 | 0.108 | 22.61 | < | ||||
| 67 | 65 | 0.397 | 0.403 | 87.78 | < | ||||
| 67 | 62 | 0.577 | 0.207 | 33.06 | < | ||||
| Average speed vs. St. Dev. wavelength | N2 | 87 | 85 | 0.649 | 0.178 | 36.93 | < | ||
| 87 | 102 | 0.214 | 0.108 | 22.73 | < | ||||
| 60 | 72 | 0.301 | 0.017 | 2.219 | 0.139 | ||||
| 64 | 65 | 0.430 | 0.016 | 2.048 | 0.155 | ||||
| Average speed vs. omega bending Pct | N2 | 25 | 147 | 0.258 | 0.006 | 0.989 | 0.322 | ||
| 45 | 144 | < | –0.098 | 0.178 | |||||
| 17 | 115 | 0.344 | 0.008 | 1.084 | 0.300 | ||||
| 22 | 107 | < | 0.127 | 0.152 | |||||
| Average speed vs. reversal Pct | N2 | 54 | 118 | –0.448 | < | ||||
| 60 | 129 | < | –0.363 | < | |||||
| 45 | 87 | 0.064 | 0.202 | 32.82 | < | ||||
| 32 | 97 | < | –0.314 | ||||||
P-values smaller than 0.05 are given boldface.
Summary of correlation between analyses for worms on plates with no lawn.
| Average speed vs. average angle | N2 | 73 | 100 | –0.2428 | |||||
| 71 | 88 | 0.680 | 0.316 | 72.63 | < | ||||
| 59 | 80 | 0.085 | 0.323 | ||||||
| 69 | 98 | 0.088 | 0.164 | 32.31 | < | ||||
| Average speed vs. St. Dev. angle | N2 | 74 | 99 | –0.198 | |||||
| 70 | 89 | 0.172 | 0.059 | 9.913 | |||||
| 70 | 69 | < | 0.207 | ||||||
| 67 | 100 | 0.177 | 0.076 | 13.62 | < | ||||
| Average speed vs. average wavelength | N2 | 88 | 85 | 0.501 | 0.044 | 7.806 | |||
| 83 | 76 | 0.873 | 0.193 | 37.48 | < | ||||
| 67 | 72 | 0.639 | 0.065 | 9.456 | |||||
| 77 | 90 | 0.593 | 0.170 | 33.80 | < | ||||
| Average speed vs. St. Dev. wavelength | N2 | 82 | 91 | 0.233 | 0.220 | 48.34 | < | ||
| 82 | 77 | 0.901 | 0.178 | 33.94 | < | ||||
| 67 | 72 | 0.887 | 0.067 | 9.837 | |||||
| 79 | 88 | 0.900 | 0.163 | 32.20 | < | ||||
| Average speed vs. omega bending Pct | N2 | 44 | 129 | –0.130 | 0.089 | ||||
| 54 | 105 | 0.198 | 0.060 | 9.997 | |||||
| 45 | 94 | 0.054 | < 0.0001 | 0.070 | 0.791 | ||||
| 30 | 137 | 0.153 | 0.043 | 7.466 | |||||
| Average speed vs. reversal Pct | N2 | 63 | 110 | –0.390 | < | ||||
| 69 | 90 | < | –0.624 | < | |||||
| 68 | 71 | 0.307 | 0.252 | 46.14 | < | ||||
| 65 | 102 | < | –0.436 | < | |||||
P-values smaller than 0.05 are given boldface.