Neuromodulation of Neuronal Circuits: Back to the Future

Marder, Eve

doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2012.09.010

Cited by 763 publications

(729 citation statements)

References 176 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

714

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most neuropeptides signal via G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) (1), with a few exceptions (2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8). As modulators of neuronal activity, neuropeptides contribute to the generation of different outputs from the same neuronal circuit in a context-dependent manner (9), or orchestrate complex motor programs (10). Many neuropeptides act as hormones and are released into the haemolymph by neurohemal organs, such as the vertebrate pituitary gland, or the insect corpora cardiaca (11).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global view of the evolution and diversity of metazoan neuropeptide signaling

Jékely

2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

380

584

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neuropeptides are signaling molecules that commonly act via G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and are generated in neurons by proneuropeptide (pNP) cleavage. Present in both cnidarians and bilaterians, neuropeptides represent an ancient and widespread mode of neuronal communication. Due to the inherent difficulties of analyzing highly diverse and repetitive pNPs, the relationships among different families are often elusive. Using similarity-based clustering and sensitive similarity searches, I obtained a global view of metazoan pNP diversity and evolution. Clustering revealed a large and diffuse network of sequences connected by significant sequence similarity encompassing one-quarter of all families. pNPs belonging to this cluster were also identified in the early-branching neuronless animal Trichoplax adhaerens. Clustering of neuropeptide GPCRs identified several orthology groups and allowed the reconstruction of the phyletic distribution of receptor families. GPCR phyletic distribution closely paralleled that of pNPs, indicating extensive conservation and long-term coevolution of receptor-ligand pairs. Receptor orthology and intermediate sequences also revealed the homology of pNPs so far considered unrelated, including allatotropin and orexin. These findings, together with the identification of deuterostome achatin and luqin and protostome opioid pNPs, extended the neuropeptide complement of the urbilaterian. Several pNPs were also identified from the hemichordate Saccoglossus kowalevskii and the cephalochordate Branchiostoma floridae, elucidating pNP evolution in deuterostomes. Receptor-ligand conservation also allowed ligand predictions for many uncharacterized GPCRs from nonmodel species. The reconstruction of the neuropeptide-signaling repertoire at deep nodes of the animal phylogeny allowed the formulation of a testable scenario of the evolution of animal neuroendocrine systems.Platynereis | proenkephalin | Petromyzon N europeptides are diverse neuron-secreted peptides with neuromodulatory, neurotransmitter, or hormonal functions. Most neuropeptides signal via G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) (1), with a few exceptions (2-8). As modulators of neuronal activity, neuropeptides contribute to the generation of different outputs from the same neuronal circuit in a context-dependent manner (9), or orchestrate complex motor programs (10). Many neuropeptides act as hormones and are released into the haemolymph by neurohemal organs, such as the vertebrate pituitary gland, or the insect corpora cardiaca (11). These peptide hormones regulate various aspects of physiology, including growth, metabolism, and reproduction. Active neuropeptides are generated from an inactive proneuropeptide (pNP) that contains a single or multiple copies of active peptides. Active peptides are commonly short, with only a few families adopting well-defined, but unrelated, folds (e.g., prolactin and glycoprotein hormones). pNPs have a signal peptide (SP) and enter the secretory apparatus where dedicated proteases cleave them at mono...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global view of the evolution and diversity of metazoan neuropeptide signaling

Jékely

2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

380

584

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ionic channel gating and vesicle release vary stochastically (Sakmann and Neher 2009;Yang and Xu-Friedman 2013), channel number and synaptic strengths vary (Roffman et al 2012;Schulz et al 2006), neuron properties may vary (Benjamin 1976), motor neuronal output varies (Williams et al 2013), neuromodulation alters responses (Marder 2012), body mechanics alters responses to neural output (Chiel et al 2009), and environmental loads may vary unexpectedly (Johansson and Westling 1988).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Motor neuronal activity varies least among individuals when it matters most for behavior

Cullins

Shaw

Gill

et al. 2015

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does motor neuronal variability affect behavior? To explore this question, we quantified activity of multiple individual identified motor neurons mediating biting and swallowing in intact, behaving Aplysia californica by recording from the protractor muscle and the three nerves containing the majority of motor neurons controlling the feeding musculature. We measured multiple motor components: duration of the activity of identified motor neurons as well as their relative timing. At the same time, we measured behavioral efficacy: amplitude of grasping movement during biting and amplitude of net inward food movement during swallowing. We observed that the total duration of the behaviors varied: Within animals, biting duration shortened from the first to the second and third bites; between animals, biting and swallowing durations varied. To study other sources of variation, motor components were divided by behavior duration (i.e., normalized). Even after normalization, distributions of motor component durations could distinguish animals as unique individuals. However, the degree to which a motor component varied among individuals depended on the role of that motor component in a behavior. Motor neuronal activity that was essential for the expression of biting or swallowing was similar among animals, whereas motor neuronal activity that was not essential for that behavior varied more from individual to individual. These results suggest that motor neuronal activity that matters most for the expression of a particular behavior may vary least from individual to individual. Shaping individual variability to ensure behavioral efficacy may be a general principle for the operation of motor systems.

show abstract

“…Evidence from many systems suggests that neuromodulators, such as biogenic amines or neuropeptides, are important regulators of internal states and behavior (Insel and Young 2000;Nassel and Winther 2010;Bargmann 2012;Marder 2012;Taghert and Nitabach 2012). As a first step toward understanding the neural coding of a state of aggressiveness, we carried out a screen for neuropeptide-secreting neurons that control agonistic behavior in Drosophila (Asahina et al 2014).…”

Section: A Neuron and A Neuropeptide That Control Aggressive Arousalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal States and Behavioral Decision-Making: Toward an Integration of Emotion and Cognition

Kennedy

Asahina²,

Hoopfer

et al. 2014

Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social interactions, such as an aggressive encounter between two conspecific males or a mating encounter between a male and a female, typically progress from an initial appetitive or motivational phase, to a final consummatory phase. This progression involves both changes in the intensity of the animals' internal state of arousal or motivation and sequential changes in their behavior. How are these internal states, and their escalating intensity, encoded in the brain? Does this escalation drive the progression from the appetitive/motivational to the consummatory phase of a social interaction and, if so, how are appropriate behaviors chosen during this progression? Recent work on social behaviors in flies and mice suggests possible ways in which changes in internal state intensity during a social encounter may be encoded and coupled to appropriate behavioral decisions at appropriate phases of the interaction. These studies may have relevance to understanding how emotion states influence cognitive behavioral decisions at higher levels of brain function.

show abstract

Neuromodulation of Neuronal Circuits: Back to the Future

Cited by 763 publications

References 176 publications

Global view of the evolution and diversity of metazoan neuropeptide signaling

Global view of the evolution and diversity of metazoan neuropeptide signaling

Motor neuronal activity varies least among individuals when it matters most for behavior

Internal States and Behavioral Decision-Making: Toward an Integration of Emotion and Cognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About