top of page

Insect Immune Function

Unlike humans and other vertebrate animals, insects do not make antibodies. Instead, they rely entirely on innate immunity. Innate immune responses are not hypervariable or highly specific, nor do they carry memory of previously encountered infections. One common form of innate immunity is production of short antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) in response to bacterial infection. AMPs are produced by all animals and plants, and even by bacteria for use against each other.  In humans and other vertebrates, AMPs are produced at high levels in epithelial barrier tissues like the lungs and gut. In insects, AMP production is activated throughout the entire body in response to injury or infection. The regulatory pathways that control AMP production are the same in insects and vertebrates, a discovery that earned the Nobel Prize in 2011

Our lab studies genetic and environmental factors that influence the effectiveness of innate immune defenses in insects. In wild insect populations (just as in any other organism), individuals are highly variable in their immune performance. We seek to understand how much of that variation has a genetic basis, and how much it is influenced by environmental variables and competing physiological demands on the host.  

AMPs.jpg

Cecropins and Defensins are among the antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) produced by Drosophila and other insects to kill infectious bacteria. AMPs are a core component of innate immune defense in all animals and plants.

Antimicrobial Peptides (AMPs)

Antimicrobial peptides provide key defense against bacterial infection in all plants and animals. While they were originally believed to have very broad spectrum activity, recent work from our group and others have shown that some AMPs can have highly specific activity against particular bacteria. We have additionally shown that natural selection can favor long-term maintenance of genetic polymorphism in AMP genes, and that even different species can share the same AMP variants. This suggests that AMPs might be adapted to the specific bacteria that the host is exposed to in its ecological niche. 

A major current project in the lab is to determine the mechanisms by which AMPs can have specific activity against particular bacteria, to test how those interactions shape AMP evolution, and to leverage that insight to engineer novel AMPs that have desirable specificity. We are currently recruiting postdocs to work on this project.

Variation in the Quality of Defense

Individuals in natural populations are highly variable in their resistance to infection. Some of that variability is due to genetic differences between the individuals, but environmental variability can also alter susceptibility to infection. Integrating genetic and environmental factors, differences in physiological condition among individuals - including due to sexual dimorphism - alter immune performance. A major objective in our research program is to identify the genetic and non-genetic factors that shape the quality of immune defense. We do this through a combination of genetic mapping and experimental manipulation of environmental and physiological conditions. We leverage the extremely powerful and high-throughput Drosophila melanogaster experimental system for this work, but the general conclusions are applicable to a diversity of infections across a range of animal hosts.

12platesblue.jpg

By plating extracts from infected flies, we can identify individuals with low pathogen burdens (left) and individuals with high pathogen burdens (right).

Tolerance of Infection

Although active immunological killing is often the first thing that comes to mind when we think about host defense against infection, in some cases, the host can achieve better health outcomes by tolerating low-grade infection. The concept of tolerance originates in agriculture, describing crop strains that are able to deliver high yields while sustaining pathogen burdens that would severely compromise other strains. The same concept can be applied to animal defense against infection: tolerant hosts are able to maintain health and fitness despite infection. Whereas the mechanisms of immunological resistance to infection are typically based in immune responses that kill pathogens, mechanisms of tolerance could be wholly independent of immunological activity. They may include healing of pathogen-induced damage, metabolic compensation for the costs of infection, or other processes that alleviate the symptoms of infection without directly reducing pathogen burden. The evolutionary pressures on tolerance mechanisms can be substantially different than those on resistance mechanisms, and host-pathogen co-evolution is expected to unfold very differently when tolerance is a bigger factor than resistance. Although tolerance may be easy to conceptually describe, it is considerably more difficult to empirically quantify. Furthermore, tolerance and resistance mechanisms are often intertwined, with genetic or environmental variability simultaneously impacting both resistance and tolerance. As we study the physiological and immunological basis for total immune defense, our team is attentive to both tolerance and resistance phenotypes and mechanisms.

Tolerance of infection is the ability to retain health and evolutionary fitness despite infection. In the left panel, Genotype A has higher tolerance of infection than Genotype B because Genotype A retains health better at high pathogen burden, whereas Genotype B health severely declines with infection burden. Tolerance can also be measured as a deviation from population norms. The right panel illustrates the proportion survival and pathogen burden for a large set of genotypes from a wild population of D. melanogaster. Deviation from the population response curve (the best fit line) indicates higher or lower tolerance of infection by each genotype. 

Key Publications

Variation in D. melanogaster Defense Quality

Lazzaro, B.P. (2025) The role of host condition and environment on infection outcome. Open Access Government https://doi.org/10.56367/OAG-045-11749 [pdf]

Keith, S.A., A.A. Kalukin, D.S. Vargas Solivan, M.R. Smee, and B.P. Lazzaro (2026) Strong GAL4 expression compromises Drosophila fat body function. Genetics 232:iyaf235. [pdf]

Shahrestani, P.* M. Chambers*, J. Vandenberg, K. Garcia, G. Malaret, P. Chowdhury, Y. Estrella, M. Zhu and B.P. Lazzaro (2018) Sexually dimorphic response to fungal infection depends on core immune signaling in Drosophila melanogaster. Scientific Reports 8:12501 [pdf]

Duneau, D.F., J.H. Im, G.A. Ortiz, H.C. Kondolf, C. Chow, M.A. Fox, A.T. Eugénio, N. Buchon* and B.P. Lazzaro* (2017) The Toll pathway underlies sexual dimorphism in response to both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria in Drosophila. BMC Biology 15:124. [pdf]

Howick, V.M. and B.P. Lazzaro (2017) The genetic architecture of defense as resistance to and tolerance of bacterial infection in Drosophila melanogaster. Molecular Ecology 26:1533-1546. [pdf]

 

Unckless, R.L., S.M. Rottschaefer and B.P. Lazzaro (2015) The complex contributions of genetics and nutrition to immunity in Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS Genetics 11(3): e1005030.

Chambers, M.C., E. Jacobson, S. Khalil and B.P. Lazzaro (2014) Thorax injury lowers resistance to infection in Drosophila melanogaster. Infection and Immunity 82:4380-4389 [pdf]

 

Fellous, S. and B.P. Lazzaro (2011) Potential for evolutionary coupling and decoupling of larval and adult immune gene expression. Molecular Ecology 20:1558-1567 [pdf]

Sackton, T.B., B.P. Lazzaro and A.G. Clark (2010) Genotype and gene expression associations with immune function in Drosophila. PLoS Genetics, 6:e1000797 [pdf]

Lazzaro, B.P., H.A. Flores, J.G. Lorigan and C.P. Yourth (2008) Genotype-by-environment interactions and adaptation to local temperature affect immunity and fecundity in Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS Pathogens 4:e1000025 [pdf]

Lazzaro, B.P., T.B. Sackton and A.G. Clark (2006) Genetic variation in Drosophila melanogaster resistance to infection: a comparison across bacteria. Genetics 174:1539-1554 [pdf]

 

Lazzaro, B.P., B.K. Sceurman and A.G. Clark (2004) The genetic basis of natural variation in D. melanogaster antibacterial immunity. Science 303:1873-1876 [pdf]

Tolerance of Infection

Lazzaro, B.P. (2025) The critical role of infection tolerance. Open Access Government July 2025 issue, pp 98-99. https://doi.org/10.56367/OAG-047-11766 [pdf]

Lazzaro, B.P. and A.T. Tate (2022) Balancing sensitivity, risk, and immunopathology in immune regulation. Current Opinion in Insect Science 50:100874 [pdf]

Troha K, J.H. Im, J. Revah, B.P. Lazzaro and N. Buchon (2018) Comparative transcriptomics reveals CrebA as a novel regulator of infection tolerance in D. melanogaster. PLoS Pathogens 14:e1006847 [pdf]

 

Howick, V.M. and B.P. Lazzaro (2017) The genetic architecture of defense as resistance to and tolerance of bacterial infection in Drosophila melanogaster. Molecular Ecology 26:1533-1546. [pdf]

Howick, V.M. and B.P. Lazzaro (2014) Genotype and diet shape resistance and tolerance across distinct phases of bacterial infection. BMC Evolutioary Biology 14:56 [pdf]

bottom of page