Development of Concurrent Retinotopic Maps in the Fly Motion Detection Circuit

Pinto-Teixeira, Filipe; Koo, Clara; Rossi, Anthony; Nériec, Nathalie; Bertet, Claire; Li, Xin; Del-Valle-Rodriguez, Alberto; Desplan, Claude

doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.02.053

Cited by 65 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We also generated transgenic flies that express PhiC31 recombinase in all post-mitotic neurons under the control of the synaptobrevin promoter 3 . We then drove expression of each SPARC construct in one of the largest genetically-defined populations of neurons in the Drosophila optic lobe, T4 and T5 cells 11 , in animals that express PhiC31 pan-neuronally. Across SPARC-GCaMP6f variants, we observed progressively fewer labeled neurons (Fig.…”

Section: Main Textmentioning

confidence: 99%

SPARC: a method to genetically manipulate precise proportions of cells

Isaacman-Beck

Cfr

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

17Many experimental approaches rely on controlling gene expression in select subsets of 18 cells within an individual animal. However, reproducibly targeting transgene expression 19 to specific fractions of a genetically-defined cell-type is challenging. We developed 20Sparse Predictive Activity through Recombinase Competition (SPARC), a generalizable 21 toolkit that can express any effector in precise proportions of post-mitotic cells in 22Drosophila. Using this approach, we demonstrate targeted expression of many 23 S2) 7 . The core of this toolkit is a set of bistable UAS-driven constructs that can be 46 switched on or off in different relative proportions of cells, depending on their 47 expression of each SPARC construct in one of the largest genetically-defined 62 populations of neurons in the Drosophila optic lobe, T4 and T5 cells 11 , in animals that 63 express PhiC31 pan-neuronally. Across SPARC-GCaMP6f variants, we observed 64 progressively fewer labeled neurons (Fig. 1C-E). SPARC-attP60-GCaMP6f labeled 65 many overlapping neurons, SPARC-attP38-GCaMP6f labeled an intermediate number 66of neurons and SPARC-attP34-GCaMP6f labeled individual neurons whose dendrites 67 could be visualized (Fig 1E inset). We therefore named these variants SPARC-D individual T5 cells relied on laborious FlpOut approaches that required titrated and 108 temporally precise heat shocks of Drosophila larvae to restrict effector expression to a 109 subset of cells [16][17][18] . In contrast, the SPARC method consistently labeled fewer T5 110 neurons, and labeled them more sparsely, than the sparsest FlpOut labeling using brief 111 and developmentally late heat-shock ( Fig. 1E, 2A,B). More importantly, when we 112 imaged visually-evoked Ca 2+ responses in regions of interest (ROIs) representing T5 113 dendrites, we observed that the fluorescent signals from SPARC-labeled ROIs were depolarized ( Figure 2I, J). Indeed, tdTomato -R2 neurons were slightly hyperpolarized 130 by light ( Figure 2I, J), implying that these R2 neurons were postsynaptic to other R2 131 neurons that express CsChrimson. Thus, the SPARC system enables optogenetic 132 activation of sparse cell populations within a single cell type, allowing us to discover 133 evidence for mutual inhibitory interactions within a cell type. Although it was already 134 known that some R neuron types inhibit other R types 20 , it was not previously known 135 that there is mutual inhibition between R neurons of the same type.

show abstract

Section: Main Textmentioning

confidence: 99%

SPARC: a method to genetically manipulate precise proportions of cells

Isaacman-Beck

Cfr

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We envision that our findings in this system will provide insights into the genetic logic of wiring specificity more broadly in both vertebrate and invertebrate systems. T4/T5 neurons share a common developmental origin, physiological function, and morphology, but differ in their precise wiring patterns and preferred stimulus (Fischbach and Dittrich, 1989;Maisak et al, 2013;Apitz and Salecker, 2018;Pinto-Teixeira et al, 2018;Shinomiya et al, 2019). T4/T5s can be classified into two quartets of subtypes based on dendritic inputs: the four T4 subtypes share a common set of dendritic inputs in the medulla, and the four T5 neurons share a different set of dendritic inputs in the lobula (Figure 1a-c).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modular transcriptional programs separately define axon and dendrite connectivity

Kurmangaliyev

Yoo

LoCascio

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patterns of synaptic connectivity are remarkably precise and complex. Single-cell RNA sequencing has revealed a vast transcriptional diversity of neurons. Nevertheless, a clear logic underlying the transcriptional control of neuronal connectivity has yet to emerge. Here, we focused on Drosophila T4/T5 neurons, a class of closely related neuronal subtypes with different wiring patterns. Eight subtypes of T4/T5 neurons are defined by combinations of two patterns of dendritic inputs and four patterns of axonal outputs. Single-cell profiling during development revealed distinct transcriptional programs defining each dendrite and axon wiring pattern. These programs were defined by the expression of a few transcription factors and different combinations of cell surface proteins. Gain and loss of function studies provide evidence for independent control of different wiring features. We propose that modular transcriptional programs for distinct wiring features are assembled in different combinations to generate diverse patterns of neuronal connectivity.

show abstract

“…A recent study by Pinto-Teixeira et al [2], along with two related studies [3,4], illustrates how simple developmental processes can be combined to produce, differentiate, and wire a large population of neurons with complex synaptic connections ( Figure 1).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%