1. Ronald L Calabrese  Is a corresponding author
  1. Emory University, United States

Movement—whether by water, air or land—is central to animal life, enabling organisms to find food and mates and to escape from predators. In the early twentieth century, the physiologist T Graham Brown identified complex networks of neurons in the spinal cords of cats that coordinated walking and other rhythmic movements (Brown, 1911, 1914). However, it was only when these networks—which are also called central pattern generators—were rediscovered in the early 1960s that their importance was fully appreciated (Wilson, 1961; Ikeda and Wiersma, 1964; Mulloney and Smarandache, 2010). From this point onwards, research into the generation of rhythmic activity by these networks and the influence of sensory feedback on this activity, has continued at a rapid pace (Marder et al., 2005; Marder and Bucher, 2007; Lamb and Calabrese, 2011).

In mammals, research into central pattern generators in the spinal cord has benefited from the advances in molecular biology afforded by the sequencing of the mouse genome (Goulding, 2009). Although our knowledge of Drosophila (fruit fly) genetics is arguably even more extensive, the small size of fruit flies has traditionally made physiological studies difficult. However, this situation is starting to change, and several groups have explored locomotion (Berni et al., 2012; Heckscher et al., 2012) and its development (Crisp et al., 2012) in fruit fly maggots.

Now, writing in eLife, César Mendes of Columbia University and colleagues, working in the laboratory of Richard Mann, report the development of new technology that can be used to track and to quantify walking in adult fruit flies (Mendes et al., 2013). Until now, this had required time-consuming manual frame-by-frame video analysis, which is a difficult process to automate (Wosnitza et al., 2012). Exploiting an optical phenomenon known as frustrated total internal reflection (fTIR), Mendes and co-workers have developed an imaging method and associated analysis software that can rapidly analyze the footprints (tarsal contacts) and body position of a fly as it walks (Figure 1). As well as revealing the insect's speed and the distance covered, the software extracts key parameters such as the degree to which limb movements are coordinated, thus allowing the insect's gait to be classified. Similar technology is already available for tracking the movements of larger animals such as rats (http://www.noldus.com/animal-behavior-research/products/catwalk), but the Columbia team is the first to scale it down to fly-like dimensions.

Insects generally employ either a tripod gait—in which three legs swing forward and the other three push backward against the ground (stance)—or a tetrapod gait, in which two legs are in swing and the remaining four are in stance. In addition to these, insects display other ‘non-canonical’ gaits that are harder to classify.

A fruit fly walking on a transparent surface. The fly was filmed from below at 250 frames per second using the FlyWalker system (biooptics.markalab.org/FlyWalker/); the frames shown here were recorded 0.08 seconds apart. A tripod stance can be seen in the third, fourth and sixth images of this series. The six legs of the fly are labelled RH (right hind), RM (right middle), RF (right front), LH (left hind), LM (left middle) and LF (left front).

FIGURE CREDIT: CS MENDES and I BARTOS.

Mendes et al. find that flies, unlike vertebrates, do not show abrupt transitions from one gait to another as they increase or decrease their speed: rather, they employ a mixture of gaits that changes with their walking speed: faster flies tend to spend more time in a tripod configuration, whereas slower flies spend more time in tetrapod or non-canonical configurations. These differences led Mendes et al. to suggest that flies use distinct neural programs for walking at different speeds.

However, the most interesting results in the current work concern the role of sensory feedback in modulating the output of central pattern generators. To examine this interaction, the Columbia team used genetically modified flies that either lack all leg proprioceptors—sensors that detect the length and tension of muscles and the angle of joints, which together provide information about a limb's position in space—or a specific class of stretch receptors known as chordotonal organs. Both types of mutant fly walked more slowly than wild-type flies, and showed a more uneven gait with footprints that were less precisely aligned. Nevertheless, the mutant flies maintained a typical tripod gait and near normal coordination of limb movements with respect to body segment and side. It seems therefore that proprioception is not essential for coordinated walking, but walking is less precise without it.

Being deprived of sensory feedback was more disruptive for mutant flies that walked slowly than it was for faster individuals. Indeed, in some respects, the behaviour of feedback-deprived flies resembled that of wild-type flies walking at high speed. These observations suggest that flies walking at slow–medium speeds use distinct neural programs from those walking at faster speeds, and that flies walking at fast speeds are less dependent on sensory feedback.

The results of this study complement work on other insects. In the slow-moving stick insect (Carausius), sensory feedback from legs in the stance phase appears to be required for inter-leg coordination (Büschges 2012), whereas this does not seem to be the case in the fruit-fly experiments at Columbia. To account for this apparent discrepancy, Mendes et al. speculate that when all six legs are equally impaired, flies resort to using the central pattern generator alone, which is sufficient to execute the tripod gait. Other recent studies on adult flies, in which single legs were amputated, are consistent with this speculation (Wosnitza et al., 2012).

The future therefore seems bright for dissection of the neuronal networks, and their sensory partners, that generate rhythmic movements in Drosophila. Although work on more traditional invertebrate preparations—in which neurons are readily accessible for electrophysiology (Marder et al., 2005; Marder and Bucher, 2007; Lamb and Calabrese, 2011)—will continue to guide the way for now, I expect that as their genetic and molecular armamentarium expands, flies will come to play a seminal role in neuronal network analysis.

References

    1. Brown TG
    (1914)
    On the nature of the fundamental activity of the nervous centres; together with an analysis of the conditioning of rhythmic activity in progression, and a theory of the evolution of function in the nervous system
    J Physiol 48:18–46.
    1. Wilson DM
    (1961)
    The central nervous control of flight in a locust
    J Exp Biol 38:471–490.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ronald L Calabrese, Reviewing Editor

    Department of Neuroscience and Behavioral Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, United States
    For correspondence
    rcalabre@biology.emory.edu
    Competing interests
    The author declares that no competing interests exist

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published: January 8, 2013 (version 1)

Copyright

© 2013, Calabrese

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 577
    Page views
  • 43
    Downloads
  • 0
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Ronald L Calabrese
(2013)
Neurophysiology: Fruit flies step out
eLife 2:e00450.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00450

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Emily L Heckman, Chris Q Doe
    Research Advance Updated

    The organization of neural circuits determines nervous system function. Variability can arise during neural circuit development (e.g. neurite morphology, axon/dendrite position). To ensure robust nervous system function, mechanisms must exist to accommodate variation in neurite positioning during circuit formation. Previously, we developed a model system in the Drosophila ventral nerve cord to conditionally induce positional variability of a proprioceptive sensory axon terminal, and used this model to show that when we altered the presynaptic position of the sensory neuron, its major postsynaptic interneuron partner modified its dendritic arbor to match the presynaptic contact, resulting in functional synaptic input (Sales et al., 2019). Here, we investigate the cellular mechanisms by which the interneuron dendrites detect and match variation in presynaptic partner location and input strength. We manipulate the presynaptic sensory neuron by (a) ablation; (b) silencing or activation; or (c) altering its location in the neuropil. From these experiments we conclude that there are two opposing mechanisms used to establish functional connectivity in the face of presynaptic variability: presynaptic contact stimulates dendrite outgrowth locally, whereas presynaptic activity inhibits postsynaptic dendrite outgrowth globally. These mechanisms are only active during an early larval critical period for structural plasticity. Collectively, our data provide new insights into dendrite development, identifying mechanisms that allow dendrites to flexibly respond to developmental variability in presynaptic location and input strength.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Arnau Llobet Rosell, Maria Paglione ... Lukas Jakob Neukomm
    Research Article

    Axon degeneration contributes to the disruption of neuronal circuit function in diseased and injured nervous systems. Severed axons degenerate following the activation of an evolutionarily conserved signaling pathway, which culminates in the activation of SARM1 in mammals to execute the pathological depletion of the metabolite NAD+. SARM1 NADase activity is activated by the NAD+ precursor nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN). In mammals, keeping NMN levels low potently preserves axons after injury. However, it remains unclear whether NMN is also a key mediator of axon degeneration and dSarm activation in flies. Here, we demonstrate that lowering NMN levels in Drosophila through the expression of a newly generated prokaryotic NMN-Deamidase (NMN-D) preserves severed axons for months and keeps them circuit-integrated for weeks. NMN-D alters the NAD+ metabolic flux by lowering NMN, while NAD+ remains unchanged in vivo. Increased NMN synthesis, by the expression of mouse nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase (mNAMPT), leads to faster axon degeneration after injury. We also show that NMN-induced activation of dSarm mediates axon degeneration in vivo. Finally, NMN-D delays neurodegeneration caused by loss of the sole NMN-consuming and NAD+-synthesizing enzyme dNmnat. Our results reveal a critical role for NMN in neurodegeneration in the fly, which extends beyond axonal injury. The potent neuroprotection by reducing NMN levels is similar to the interference with other essential mediators of axon degeneration in Drosophila.