The avoidance of light by fly larvae is a classic paradigm for sensorimotor behavior. Here, we use behavioral assays and video microscopy to quantify the sensorimotor structure of phototaxis using the Drosophila larva. Larval locomotion is composed of sequences of runs (periods of forward movement) that are interrupted by abrupt turns, during which the larva pauses and sweeps its head back and forth, probing local light information to determine the direction of the successive run. All phototactic responses are mediated by the same set of sensorimotor transformations that require temporal processing of sensory inputs. Through functional imaging and genetic inactivation of specific neurons downstream of the sensory periphery, we have begun to map these sensorimotor circuits into the larval central brain. We find that specific sensorimotor pathways that govern distinct light-evoked responses begin to segregate at the first relay after the photosensory neurons.N avigating organisms must extract spatial information about their surroundings to orient and move toward preferred environments. Phototaxis of fly larvae has long been a paradigm for understanding the mechanisms of animal orientation behavior (1). The study of phototaxis in the Drosophila larva provides an opportunity to investigate the circuits for orientation behavior from sensory input to motor output in a small nervous system. First, however, the sensorimotor structure of responses to illumination must be defined by studying larval behavior in controlled environments.The tropism theory of Jacques Loeb states that bilateral body plans allow animals to extract spatial information through the sensation of external forces acting asymmetrically on symmetric body halves. The navigation of fly larvae away from incident light rays was interpreted as a direct demonstration of tropism. However, temporal comparisons performed by moving animals, also known as klinotaxis, also can encode spatial information (2). Like most fly larvae, Drosophila larvae are negatively phototactic during most of their development (3-9). To navigate away from light, the Drosophila larva uses two sets of photosensors, the Rhodopsin-expressing Bolwig's organs (BO) that mediate phototaxis at low light levels and the non-Rhodopsin-expressing class IV multidendritic (md) neurons that respond to intense light levels comparable to direct sunlight (10). Here, we sought to resolve the sensorimotor structure of larval phototaxis to understand how these photosensitive structures extract and use information about ambient light conditions to control motor behavior.We developed a tracking assay and illumination system that allowed us to quantify the movements of individual animals in defined spatiotemporal illumination patterns at both low and high light intensities. We uncovered a set of sensorimotor relationships that allow the larva to navigate away from light based on temporal processing of sensory inputs. Even the capacity to navigate away from directed illumination is mediated by temporal process...

Complex animal behaviors are built from dynamical relationships between sensory inputs, neuronal activity, and motor outputs in patterns with strategic value. Connecting these patterns illuminates how nervous systems compute behavior. Here, we study Drosophila larva navigation up temperature gradients toward preferred temperatures (positive thermotaxis). By tracking the movements of animals responding to fixed spatial temperature gradients or random temperature fluctuations, we calculate the sensitivity and dynamics of the conversion of thermosensory inputs into motor responses. We discover three thermosensory neurons in each dorsal organ ganglion (DOG) that are required for positive thermotaxis. Random optogenetic stimulation of the DOG thermosensory neurons evokes behavioral patterns that mimic the response to temperature variations. In vivo calcium and voltage imaging reveals that the DOG thermosensory neurons exhibit activity patterns with sensitivity and dynamics matched to the behavioral response. Temporal processing of temperature variations carried out by the DOG thermosensory neurons emerges in distinct motor responses during thermotaxis. N avigation toward environmental conditions that improve survival and fitness is of near-universal importance in motile biological organisms. Quantitative analysis of such animal behaviors to defined sensory inputs is a powerful approach to elucidate how behavior is encoded in underlying neurons and circuits. The advantage of studying navigation in small, optically transparent, genetically modifiable animals like Caenorhabditis elegans (1) or Drosophila larvae (2) is the opportunity to dissect sensory, neuronal, and behavioral dynamics in live animals by using optical neurophysiology and optogenetics throughout the nervous system.The Drosophila melanogaster larva navigates gradients of many sensory cues, including light, temperature, odors, and tastes, but with fewer neurons in its sensory periphery and brain than the adult. Moreover, the simpler body plan and crawling movements of the larva facilitate the precise quantification of behavioral dynamics. Poikilotherms like C. elegans or Drosophila use sensitive thermosensory mechanisms to navigate moderate temperature ranges, thereby enabling them to use their environments to regulate their own body temperatures (3, 4). Here, we study sensory and behavioral dynamics during positive thermotaxis (i.e., cool avoidance) by the Drosophila larva. Tracking the movements of Drosophila exploring temperature, olfactory, or gaseous gradients has shown that their navigation is generated by a sequence of two alternating motor programs: runs involving peristaltic forward movement that are interrupted by turns involving probing side-to-side head sweeps until the initiation of a new run (5-8). Larvae negotiating temperature gradients stochastically transition between runs and turns by strategies that cause runs pointed in favorable directions to be more frequent and longer than runs pointed in unfavorable directions. These transitions b...

Through analysis of the Drosophila ionotropic receptors (IRs), a family of variant ionotropic glutamate receptors, we reveal that most IRs are expressed in peripheral neuron populations in diverse gustatory organs in larvae and adults. We characterise IR56d, which defines two anatomically-distinct neuron classes in the proboscis: one responds to carbonated solutions and fatty acids while the other represents a subset of sugar- and fatty acid-sensing cells. Mutational analysis indicates that IR56d, together with the broadly-expressed co-receptors IR25a and IR76b, is essential for physiological responses to carbonation and fatty acids, but not sugars. We further demonstrate that carbonation and fatty acids both promote IR56d-dependent attraction of flies, but through different behavioural outputs. Our work provides a toolkit for investigating taste functions of IRs, defines a subset of these receptors required for carbonation sensing, and illustrates how the gustatory system uses combinatorial expression of sensory molecules in distinct neurons to coordinate behaviour.

Visual organs perceive environmental stimuli required for rapid initiation of behaviors and can also entrain the circadian clock. The larval eye of Drosophila is capable of both functions. Each eye contains only 12 photoreceptors (PRs), which can be subdivided into two subtypes. Four PRs express blue-sensitive rhodopsin5 (rh5) and eight express green-sensitive rhodopsin6 (rh6). We found that either PR-subtype is sufficient to entrain the molecular clock by light, while only the Rh5-PR subtype is essential for light avoidance. Acetylcholine (ACh) released from PRs confers both functions. Both subtypes of larval PRs innervate the main circadian pacemaker neurons of the larva, the PDF-expressing lateral neurons (LNs), providing sensory input to control circadian rhythms. However, we show that PDF-expressing LNs are dispensable for light avoidance, and a distinct set of three clock neurons is required. Thus we have identified distinct sensory and central circuitry regulating light avoidance behavior and clock entrainment. Our findings provide insights into the coding of sensory information for distinct behavioral functions and the underlying molecular and neuronal circuitry.

Specificity of sensory neurons requires restricted expression of one sensory receptor gene and the exclusion of all others within a given cell. In the Drosophila retina, functional identity of photoreceptors depends on light-sensitive Rhodopsins (Rhs). The much simpler larval eye (Bolwig organ) is composed of about 12 photoreceptors, eight of which are green-sensitive (Rh6) and four blue-sensitive (Rh5) 1 . The larval eye becomes the adult extraretinal 'eyelet' composed of four greensensitive (Rh6) photoreceptors 2,3 . Here we show that, during metamorphosis, all Rh6 photoreceptors die, whereas the Rh5 photoreceptors switch fate by turning off Rh5 and then turning on Rh6 expression. This switch occurs without apparent changes in the programme of transcription factors that specify larval photoreceptor subtypes. We also show that the transcription factor Senseless (Sens) mediates the very different cellular behaviours of Rh5 and Rh6 photoreceptors. Sens is restricted to Rh5 photoreceptors and must be excluded from Rh6 photoreceptors to allow them to die at metamorphosis. Finally, we show that Ecdysone receptor (EcR) functions autonomously both for the death of larval Rh6 photoreceptors and for the sensory switch of Rh5 photoreceptors to express Rh6. This fate switch of functioning, terminally differentiated neurons provides a novel, unexpected example of hard-wired sensory plasticity.The adult Drosophila eyelet comprises approximately four photoreceptors located between the retina and the optic ganglia 2 . It directly contacts the pacemaker neurons of the adult fly, the lateral neurons 4 . In conjunction with the compound eye and the clock-neuron intrinsic bluesensitive receptor cryptochrome 3 it helps shift the phase of the molecular clock in response to light. All eyelet photoreceptors express green-sensitive Rh6, and are derived from photoreceptors of the larval eye 2,5,6 that mediate light avoidance and entrainment of the molecular clock by innervating the larval lateral neurons 7-9 .Larval photoreceptors develop in a two-step process during embryogenesis 1,10 . Primary precursors are specified first and develop as the four Rh5-subtype photoreceptors. They signal through Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) to the surrounding tissue to develop as secondary precursors, which develop into the eight Rh6-subtype photoreceptors 1 . Two transcription factors specify larval photoreceptor subtypes 1 . Spalt (Sal) is exclusively expressed in Rh5 photoreceptors, where it is required for Rh5 expression. Seven-up (Svp) is restricted to Rh6 photoreceptors, where it represses sal and promotes Rh6 expression. A third

Although development of the adult Drosophila compound eye is very well understood, little is known about development of photoreceptors (PRs) in the simple larval eye. We show here that the larval eye is composed of 12 PRs, four of which express blue-sensitive rhodopsin5 (rh5) while the other eight contain green-sensitive rh6. This is similar to the 30:70 ratio of adult blue and green R8 cells. However, the stochastic choice of adult color PRs and the bistable loop of the warts and melted tumor suppressor genes that unambiguously specify rh5 and rh6 in R8 PRs are not involved in specification of larval PRs. Instead, primary PR precursors signal via EGFR to surrounding tissue to develop as secondary precursors, which will become Rh6-expressing PRs. EGFR signaling is required for the survival of the Rh6 subtype. Primary precursors give rise to the Rh5 subtype. Furthermore, the combinatorial action of the transcription factors Spalt, Seven-up, and Orthodenticle specifies the two PR subtypes. Therefore, even though the larval PRs and adult R8 PRs express the same rhodopsins (rh5 and rh6), they use very distinct mechanisms for their specification.[Keywords: Drosophila; visual system development; photoreceptor specification; transcription factor interaction; EGFR signaling] Supplemental material is available at http://www.genesdev.org. In spite of the morphological and developmental differences between vertebrate and invertebrate eyes, their basic function to translate light information from the environment to the brain is maintained. In Drosophila, the adult compound eye has been studied in great detail. It consists of ∼800 individual ommatidia. Each ommatidium contains eight photoreceptor cells (PRs): six outer PRs (R1-R6) and two inner PRs (R7 and R8). Different PRs are sensitive to different wavelengths of light, depending on the rhodopsin gene (rh) they express. Outer PRs are involved in motion detection and contain Rh1, a broad-spectrum photopigment. R7 and R8 each expresses a distinct rh with restricted absorption spectra-rh3, rh4, rh5, and rh6. The type of rh expressed in inner PRs defines two major types of ommatidia: The pale (p) ommatidia have R7 that contain UV-sensitive Rh3 with the corresponding R8 expressing blue Rh5, whereas in yellow (y) ommatidia, R7 expresses UV-sensitive Rh4 and R8 expresses green Rh6.Recently, substantial progress has been achieved in understanding the molecular basis of how different subtypes of PRs are specified (Wernet and Desplan 2004;Mikeladze-Dvali et al. 2005a). Initially, R7 and R8 express the transcription factor spalt (sal) that is required to specify them as inner PRs and distinguish them from outer PR identity (Mollereau et al. 2001). Then, the expression in R7 of the gene prospero (pros), which encodes a homeodomain transcription factor, further distinguishes R7 from R8 by repressing R8 rhs, rh5, and rh6 .The generation of the two types of ommatidia, yellow and pale, includes several steps. First, the stochastic expression of the transcription factor Spineless (Ss) in ...

Protein–protein interactions are crucial for cellular homeostasis and play important roles in the dynamic execution of biological processes. While antibodies represent a well-established tool to study protein interactions of extracellular domains and secreted proteins, as well as in fixed and permeabilized cells, they usually cannot be functionally expressed in the cytoplasm of living cells. Non-immunoglobulin protein-binding scaffolds have been identified that also function intracellularly and are now being engineered for synthetic biology applications. Here we used the Designed Ankyrin Repeat Protein (DARPin) scaffold to generate binders to fluorescent proteins and used them to modify biological systems directly at the protein level. DARPins binding to GFP or mCherry were selected by ribosome display. For GFP, binders with KD as low as 160 pM were obtained, while for mCherry the best affinity was 6 nM. We then verified in cell culture their specific binding in a complex cellular environment and found an affinity cut-off in the mid-nanomolar region, above which binding is no longer detectable in the cell. Next, their binding properties were employed to change the localization of the respective fluorescent proteins within cells. Finally, we performed experiments in Drosophila melanogaster and Danio rerio and utilized these DARPins to either degrade or delocalize fluorescently tagged fusion proteins in developing organisms, and to phenocopy loss-of-function mutations. Specific protein binders can thus be selected in vitro and used to reprogram developmental systems in vivo directly at the protein level, thereby bypassing some limitations of approaches that function at the DNA or the RNA level.

Cell diversity of the brain and how it is affected by starvation, remains largely unknown. Here, we introduce a single cell transcriptome atlas of the entire Drosophila first instar larval brain. We first assigned cell-type identity based on known marker genes, distinguishing five major groups: neural progenitors, differentiated neurons, glia, undifferentiated neurons and non-neural cells. All major classes were further subdivided into multiple subtypes, revealing biological features of various cell-types. We further assessed transcriptional changes in response to starvation at the single-cell level. While after starvation the composition of the brain remains unaffected, transcriptional profile of several cell clusters changed. Intriguingly, different cell-types show very distinct responses to starvation, suggesting the presence of cell-specific programs for nutrition availability. Establishing a single-cell transcriptome atlas of the larval brain provides a powerful tool to explore cell diversity and assess genetic profiles from developmental, functional and behavioral perspectives.