We report the surprising finding that several transposable elements are highly active in Drosophila brain during normal aging. We also show that mutations in Drosophila Argonaute 2 (dAgo2) exhibit exacerbated transposon expression in brain, progressive and age-dependent memory impairment and shortened lifespan. These findings suggest that transposon activation may contribute to age-dependent loss of neuronal function.
Summary Background A common feature of memory and its underlying synaptic plasticity is that each can be dissected into short-lived forms involving modification or trafficking of existing proteins and long-term forms that require new gene expression. An underlying assumption of this cellular view of memory consolidation is that these different mechanisms occur within a single neuron. At the neuro-anatomical level, however, different temporal stages of memory can engage distinct neural circuits, a notion that has not been conceptually integrated with the cellular view. Results We have investigated this issue in the context of aversive Pavlovian olfactory memory in Drosophila. Previous studies have demonstrated a central role for cAMP signaling in the mushroom body (MB). The Ca++ responsive adenylyl cyclase rutabaga is believed to be a coincidence detector in γ neurons, one of the three principle classes of MB Kenyon cells. We are able to separately restore short-term or long-term memory to a rutabaga mutant with expression of rutabaga in different subsets of MB neurons. Conclusions Our findings suggest a model in which the learning experience initiates two parallel associations: a short-lived trace in MB γ neurons, and a long-lived trace in α/β neurons.
Elevated expression of specific transposable elements (TEs) has been observed in several neurodegenerative disorders. TEs also can be active during normal neurogenesis. By mining a series of deep sequencing datasets of protein-RNA interactions and of gene expression profiles, we uncovered extensive binding of TE transcripts to TDP-43, an RNA-binding protein central to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). Second, we find that association between TDP-43 and many of its TE targets is reduced in FTLD patients. Third, we discovered that a large fraction of the TEs to which TDP-43 binds become de-repressed in mouse TDP-43 disease models. We propose the hypothesis that TE mis-regulation contributes to TDP-43 related neurodegenerative diseases.
SUMMARY Mushroom body (MB) dependent olfactory learning in Drosophila provides a powerful model to investigate memory mechanisms. MBs integrate olfactory conditioned stimuli (CS) inputs with neuromodulatory reinforcement (unconditioned stimuli, US) [1, 2], which for aversive learning is thought to rely on dopaminergic (DA) signaling [3–6] to DopR, a D1-like dopamine receptor expressed in MB [7, 8]. A wealth of evidence suggests the conclusion that parallel and independent signaling occurs downstream of DopR within two MB neuron cell types, with each supporting half of memory performance. For instance, expression of the rutabaga adenylyl cyclase (rut) in γ neurons is sufficient to restore normal learning to rut mutants [9] whereas expression of Neurofibromatosis I (NFI) in α/β neurons is sufficient to rescue NF1 mutants [10, 11]. DopR mutations are the only case where memory performance is fully eliminated [7], consistent with the hypothesis that DopR receives the US inputs for both γ and α/β lobe traces. We demonstrate, however, that DopR expression in γ neurons is sufficient to fully support short (STM) and long-term memory (LTM). We argue that DA-mediated CS-US association is formed in γ neurons followed by communication between γ and α/β neurons to drive consolidation.
The brain represents sensory information in the coordinated activity of neuronal ensembles. Although the microcircuits underlying olfactory processing are well characterized in Drosophila, no studies to date have examined the encoding of odor identity by populations of neurons and related it to the odor specificity of olfactory behavior. Here we used two-photon Ca 2ϩ imaging to record odor-evoked responses from Ͼ100 neurons simultaneously in the Drosophila mushroom body (MB). For the first time, we demonstrate quantitatively that MB population responses contain substantial information on odor identity. Using a series of increasingly similar odor blends, we identified conditions in which odor discrimination is difficult behaviorally. We found that MB ensemble responses accounted well for olfactory acuity in this task. Kenyon cell ensembles with as few as 25 cells were sufficient to match behavioral discrimination accuracy. Using a generalization task, we demonstrated that the MB population code could predict the flies' responses to novel odors. The degree to which flies generalized a learned aversive association to unfamiliar test odors depended upon the relative similarity between the odors' evoked MB activity patterns. Discrimination and generalization place different demands on the animal, yet the flies' choices in these tasks were reliably predicted based on the amount of overlap between MB activity patterns. Therefore, these different behaviors can be understood in the context of a single physiological framework.
Recent studies have identified molecular pathways driving forgetting and supported the notion that forgetting is a biologically active process. The circuit mechanisms of forgetting, however, remain largely unknown. Here we report two sets of Drosophila neurons that account for the rapid forgetting of early olfactory aversive memory. We show that inactivating these neurons inhibits memory decay without altering learning, whereas activating them promotes forgetting. These neurons, including a cluster of dopaminergic neurons (PAM-β′1) and a pair of glutamatergic neurons (MBON-γ4>γ1γ2), terminate in distinct subdomains in the mushroom body and represent parallel neural pathways for regulating forgetting. Interestingly, although activity of these neurons is required for memory decay over time, they are not required for acute forgetting during reversal learning. Our results thus not only establish the presence of multiple neural pathways for forgetting in Drosophila but also suggest the existence of diverse circuit mechanisms of forgetting in different contexts.forgetting | Drosophila melanogaster | associative memory | mushroom body | reversal learning A lthough forgetting commonly has a negative connotation, it is a functional process that shapes memory and cognition (1-4). Recent studies, including work in relatively simple invertebrate models, have started to reveal basic biological mechanisms underlying forgetting (5-15). In Drosophila, single-session Pavlovian conditioning by pairing an odor (conditioned stimulus, CS) with electric shock (unconditioned stimulus, US) induces aversive memories that are short-lasting (16). The memory performance of fruit flies is observed to drop to a negligible level within 24 h, decaying rapidly early after training and slowing down thereafter (17). Memory decay or forgetting requires the activation of the small G protein Rac, a signaling protein involved in actin remodeling, in the mushroom body (MB) intrinsic neurons (6). These so-called Kenyon cells (KCs) are the neurons that integrate CS-US information (18,19) and support aversive memory formation and retrieval (20)(21)(22). In addition to Rac, forgetting also requires the DAMB dopamine receptor (7), which has highly enriched expression in the MB (23). Evidence suggests that the dopamine-mediated forgetting signal is conveyed to the MB by dopamine neurons (DANs) in the protocerebral posterior lateral 1 (PPL1) cluster (7,24). Therefore, forgetting of olfactory aversive memory in Drosophila depends on a particular set of intracellular molecular pathways within KCs, involving Rac, DAMB, and possibly others (25), and also receives modulation from extrinsic neurons. Although important cellular evidence supporting the hypothesis that memory traces are erased under these circumstances is still lacking, these findings lend support to the notion that forgetting is an active, biologically regulated process (17,26).Although existing studies point to the MB circuit as essential for forgetting, several questions remain to be answered. Fir...
Drosophila Pumilio (Pum) protein is a translational regulator involved in embryonic patterning and germline development. Recent findings demonstrate that Pum also plays an important role in the nervous system, both at the neuromuscular junction (NMJ) and in long-term memory formation. In neurons, Pum appears to play a role in homeostatic control of excitability via down regulation of para, a voltage gated sodium channel, and may more generally modulate local protein synthesis in neurons via translational repression of eIF-4E. Aside from these, the biologically relevant targets of Pum in the nervous system remain largely unknown. We hypothesized that Pum might play a role in regulating the local translation underlying synapse-specific modifications during memory formation. To identify relevant translational targets, we used an informatics approach to predict Pum targets among mRNAs whose products have synaptic localization. We then used both in vitro binding and two in vivo assays to functionally confirm the fidelity of this informatics screening method. We find that Pum strongly and specifically binds to RNA sequences in the 3′UTR of four of the predicted target genes, demonstrating the validity of our method. We then demonstrate that one of these predicted target sequences, in the 3′UTR of discs large (dlg1), the Drosophila PSD95 ortholog, can functionally substitute for a canonical NRE (Nanos response element) in vivo in a heterologous functional assay. Finally, we show that the endogenous dlg1 mRNA can be regulated by Pumilio in a neuronal context, the adult mushroom bodies (MB), which is an anatomical site of memory storage.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.