The neuropeptide PDF is released by sixteen clock neurons in Drosophila and helps maintain circadian activity rhythms by coordinating a network of approximately 150 neuronal clocks. Whether PDF acts directly on elements of this neural network remains unknown. We address this question by adapting Epac1-camps, a genetically encoded cAMP FRET sensor, for use in the living brain. We find that a subset of the PDF-expressing neurons respond to PDF with long-lasting cAMP increases and confirm that such responses require the PDF receptor. In contrast, an unrelated Drosophila neuropeptide, DH31, stimulates large cAMP increases in all PDF-expressing clock neurons. Thus, the network of approximately 150 clock neurons displays widespread, though not uniform, PDF receptivity. This work introduces a sensitive means of measuring cAMP changes in a living brain with subcellular resolution. Specifically, it experimentally confirms the longstanding hypothesis that PDF is a direct modulator of most neurons in the Drosophila clock network.

The neuropeptide Pigment-Dispersing Factor (PDF) is a principle transmitter regulating circadian locomotor rhythms in Drosophila. We have identified a Class II (secretin-related) G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that is specifically responsive to PDF and also to calcitonin-like peptides and to PACAP. In response to PDF, the PDF receptor (PDFR) elevates cAMP levels when expressed in HEK293 cells. As predicted by in vivo studies, cotransfection of Neurofibromatosis Factor 1 significantly improves coupling of PDFR to adenylate cyclase. pdfr mutant flies display increased circadian arrhythmicity, and also display altered geotaxis that is epistatic to that of pdf mutants. PDFR immunosignals are expressed by diverse neurons, but only by a small subset of circadian pacemakers. These data establish the first synapse within the Drosophila circadian neural circuit and underscore the importance of Class II peptide GPCR signaling in circadian neural systems.

The molecular mechanisms of circadian rhythms are well known, but how multiple clocks within one organism generate a structured rhythmic output remains a mystery. Many animals show bimodal activity rhythms with morning (M) and evening (E) activity bouts. One long-standing model assumes that two mutually coupled oscillators underlie these bouts and show different sensitivities to light. Three groups of lateral neurons (LN) and three groups of dorsal neurons govern behavioral rhythmicity of Drosophila. Recent data suggest that two groups of the LN (the ventral subset of the small LN cells and the dorsal subset of LN cells) are plausible candidates for the M and E oscillator, respectively. We provide evidence that these neuronal groups respond differently to light and can be completely desynchronized from one another by constant light, leading to two activity components that free-run with different periods. As expected, a long-period component started from the E activity bout. However, a short-period component originated not exclusively from the morning peak but more prominently from the evening peak. This reveals an interesting deviation from the original Pittendrigh and Daan (1976) model and suggests that a subgroup of the ventral subset of the small LN acts as "main" oscillator controlling M and E activity bouts in Drosophila.

Daily rhythms in behavior emerge from networks of neurons that express molecular clocks. Drosophila’s clock neuron network consists of a diversity of cell types, yet is modeled as two hierarchically organized groups, one of which serves as a master pacemaker. Here we establish that the fly’s clock neuron network consists of multiple units of independent neuronal oscillators, each unified by its neuropeptide transmitter and mode of coupling to other units. Our work reveals that the circadian clock neuron network is not orchestrated by a small group of master pacemakers but rather consists of multiple independent oscillators, each of which drives rhythms in activity.

The clock-gene-expressing lateral neurons are essential for the locomotor activity rhythm of Drosophila melanogaster. Traditionally, these neurons are divided into three groups: the dorsal lateral neurons (LN(d)), the large ventral lateral neurons (l-LN(v)), and the small ventral lateral neurons (s-LN(v)), whereby the latter group consists of four neurons that express the neuropeptide pigment-dispersing factor (PDF) and a fifth PDF-negative neuron. So far, only the l-LN(v) and the PDF-positive s-LN(v) have been shown to project into the accessory medulla, a small neuropil that contains the circadian pacemaker center in several insects. We show here that the other lateral neurons also arborize in the accessory medulla, predominantly forming postsynaptic sites. Both the l-LN(v) and LN(d) are anatomically well suited to connect the accessory medullae. Whereas the l-LN(v) may receive ipsilateral photic input from the Hofbauer-Buchner eyelet, the LN(d) invade mainly the contralateral accessory medulla and thus may receive photic input from the contralateral side. Both the LN(d) and the l-LN(v) differentiate during midmetamorphosis. They do so in close proximity to one another and the fifth PDF-negative s-LN(v), suggesting that these cell groups may derive from common precursors.

Antisera against the circadian clock proteins Period (PER) and Timeless (TIM) were used to construct a detailed time course of PER and TIM expression and subcellular localization in a subset of the ventrolateral neurons (vLNs) in the Drosophila accessory medulla (AMe). These neurons, which express pigment-dispersing factor, play a central role in the control of behavioral rhythms. The data revealed several unexpected features of the circadian clock in Drosophila. First, TIM but not PER was restricted to the cytoplasm of vLNs throughout most of the early night. Second, the timing of TIM and PER nuclear accumulation was substantially different. Third, the two subsets of vLNs, the large and small vLNs, had a similar timing of PER nuclear accumulation but differed by 3-4 hr in the phase of TIM nuclear accumulation. These aspects of PER and TIM expression were not predicted by the current mechanistic model of the circadian clock in Drosophila and are inconsistent with the hypothesis that PER and TIM function as obligate heterodimers. The differing profiles of TIM and PER nuclear accumulation suggest that PER and TIM have distinct functions in the nuclei of vLNs.

In the brain of the fly Drosophila melanogaster, ∼150 clock-neurons are organized to synchronize and maintain behavioral rhythms, but the physiological and neurochemical bases of their interactions are largely unknown. Here we reevaluate the cellular properties of these pacemakers by application of a novel genetic reporter and several phenotypic markers. First, we describe an enhancer trap marker called R32 that specifically reveals several previously undescribed aspects of the fly's central neuronal pacemakers. We find evidence for a previously unappreciated class of neuronal pacemakers, the lateral posterior neurons (LPNs), and establish anatomical, molecular, and developmental criteria to establish a subclass within the dorsal neuron 1 (DN1) group of pacemakers. Furthermore, we show that the neuropeptide IPNamide is specifically expressed by this DN1 subclass. These observations implicate IPNamide as a second candidate circadian transmitter in the Drosophila brain. Finally, we present molecular and anatomical evidence for unrecognized phenotypic diversity within each of four established classes of clock neurons. Indexing termsDrosophila; circadian clock; neuropeptides; PDF receptor; IPNamide; nplp1; glass Overt biological rhythms such as the predictable daily leaf movements of plants and the sleep/ wake cycle of animals are ultimately driven by molecular oscillations. Throughout the living world such oscillations are sustained by intracellular transcriptional/translational feedback loops (reviewed by Dunlap, 1999). In Drosophila many components of the molecular clock are known in detail. Products of the clock genes period (per), timeless (tim), Clock, cycle, vrille, and PAR domain protein 1 (Pdp1) form two interconnected and self-sustained transcriptional feedback loops, the kinetics of which are regulated by clock protein interactions and attendant kinases (recently reviewed by Hardin, 2004;Schöning and Staiger, 2005;Taghert and Lin, 2005). Although the core clock genes are expressed rhythmically throughout the fly's body, only a few small groups of clock-expressing neurons in the central brain (termed pacemakers) are necessary and sufficient for the organization and maintenance of rhythmic locomotor activity (reviewed by Hall, 2005;Helfrich-Förster, 2005). When these pacemaker *Correspondence to: Paul Taghert, Dept. Anatomy and Neurobiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave., St. Louis, MO 63110. E-mail: taghertp@pcg.wustl.edu. Current address for S.C.P. Renn: Bauer Center for Genomics Research, Harvard University, 7 Divinity Ave., Rm. 249, Cambridge, MA 02138. NIH Public Access NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript neurons of Drosophila are electrically silenced their molecular oscillations are lost under constant conditions, suggesting that electrical activity at the cell membrane is required for the endogenous molecular clockwork (Nitabach et al., 2002).Approximately 150 neurons express the dynamic molecular clockwork in the adult ...

Locomotor activity rhythms are controlled by a network of ~150 circadian neurons within the adult Drosophila brain. They are subdivided based on their anatomical locations and properties. We profiled transcripts “around the clock” from three key groups of circadian neurons with different functions. We also profiled a non-circadian outgroup, dopaminergic (TH) neurons. They have cycling transcripts but fewer than clock neurons as well as low expression and poor cycling of clock gene transcripts. This suggests that TH neurons do not have a canonical circadian clock and that their gene expression cycling is driven by brain systemic cues. The three circadian groups are surprisingly diverse in their cycling transcripts and overall gene expression patterns, which include known and putative novel neuropeptides. Even the overall phase distributions of cycling transcripts are distinct, indicating that different regulatory principles govern transcript oscillations. This surprising cell-type diversity parallels the functional heterogeneity of the different neurons.