The Ret receptor regulates sensory neuron dendrite growth and integrin mediated adhesion

  1. Peter Soba  Is a corresponding author
  2. Chun Han
  3. Yi Zheng
  4. Daniel Perea
  5. Irene Miguel-Aliaga
  6. Lily Yeh Jan
  7. Yuh Nung Jan
  1. University of Hamburg, Germany
  2. Cornell University, United States
  3. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Francisco, United States
  4. Imperial College London, United Kingdom

Abstract

Neurons develop highly stereotyped receptive fields by coordinated growth of their dendrites. Although cell surface cues play a major role in this process, few dendrite specific signals have been identified to date. We conducted an in vivo RNAi screen in Drosophila class IV dendritic arborization (C4da) neurons and identified the conserved Ret receptor, known to play a role in axon guidance, as an important regulator of dendrite development. The loss of Ret results in severe dendrite defects due to loss of extracellular matrix adhesion, thus impairing growth within a 2D plane. We provide evidence that Ret interacts with integrins to regulate dendrite adhesion via rac1. In addition, Ret is required for dendrite stability and normal F-actin distribution suggesting it has an essential role in dendrite maintenance. We propose novel functions for Ret as a regulator in dendrite patterning and adhesion distinct from its role in axon guidance.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Peter Soba

    Center for Molecular Neurobiology, University Medical Campus, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
    For correspondence
    peter.soba@zmnh.uni-hamburg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Chun Han

    Weill Institute for Cell and Molecular Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Yi Zheng

    Department of Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Daniel Perea

    Gut Signalling and Metabolism Group, MRC Clinical Sciences Centre, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Irene Miguel-Aliaga

    Gut Signalling and Metabolism Group, MRC Clinical Sciences Centre, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Lily Yeh Jan

    Department of Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Yuh Nung Jan

    Department of Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2015, Soba et al.

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

Metrics

  • 3,475
    views
  • 874
    downloads
  • 37
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

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. Peter Soba
  2. Chun Han
  3. Yi Zheng
  4. Daniel Perea
  5. Irene Miguel-Aliaga
  6. Lily Yeh Jan
  7. Yuh Nung Jan
(2015)
The Ret receptor regulates sensory neuron dendrite growth and integrin mediated adhesion
eLife 4:e05491.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05491

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05491

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Sisi Wang, Freek van Ede
    Research Article

    A classic distinction from the domain of external attention is that between anticipatory orienting and subsequent re-orienting of attention to unexpected events. Whether and how humans also re-orient attention ‘in mind’ following expected and unexpected working-memory tests remains elusive. We leveraged spatial modulations in neural activity and gaze to isolate re-orienting within the spatial layout of visual working memory following central memory tests of certain, expected, or unexpected mnemonic content. Besides internal orienting after predictive cues, we unveil a second stage of internal attentional deployment following both expected and unexpected memory tests. Following expected tests, internal attentional deployment was not contingent on prior orienting, suggesting an additional verification – ‘double checking’ – in memory. Following unexpected tests, re-focusing of alternative memory content was prolonged. This brings attentional re-orienting to the domain of working memory and underscores how memory tests can invoke either a verification or a revision of our internal focus.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Brian DePasquale, Carlos D Brody, Jonathan W Pillow
    Research Article Updated

    Accumulating evidence to make decisions is a core cognitive function. Previous studies have tended to estimate accumulation using either neural or behavioral data alone. Here, we develop a unified framework for modeling stimulus-driven behavior and multi-neuron activity simultaneously. We applied our method to choices and neural recordings from three rat brain regions—the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), the frontal orienting fields (FOF), and the anterior-dorsal striatum (ADS)—while subjects performed a pulse-based accumulation task. Each region was best described by a distinct accumulation model, which all differed from the model that best described the animal’s choices. FOF activity was consistent with an accumulator where early evidence was favored while the ADS reflected near perfect accumulation. Neural responses within an accumulation framework unveiled a distinct association between each brain region and choice. Choices were better predicted from all regions using a comprehensive, accumulation-based framework and different brain regions were found to differentially reflect choice-related accumulation signals: FOF and ADS both reflected choice but ADS showed more instances of decision vacillation. Previous studies relating neural data to behaviorally inferred accumulation dynamics have implicitly assumed that individual brain regions reflect the whole-animal level accumulator. Our results suggest that different brain regions represent accumulated evidence in dramatically different ways and that accumulation at the whole-animal level may be constructed from a variety of neural-level accumulators.