Appetite controlled by a cholecystokinin nucleus of the solitary tract to hypothalamus neurocircuit

  1. Giuseppe D'Agostino
  2. David Joseph Lyons
  3. Claudia Cristiano
  4. Luke Kennedy Burke
  5. Joseph C Madara
  6. John N Campbell
  7. Ana Paula Garcia
  8. Benjamin Bruce Land
  9. Bradford B Lowell
  10. Ralph Joseph Dileone
  11. Lora K Heisler  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Aberdeen, United Kingdom
  2. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
  3. Harvard Medical School, United States
  4. Yale University School of Medicine, United States

Abstract

The nucleus of the solitary tract (NTS) is a key gateway for meal-related signals entering the brain from the periphery. However, the chemical mediators crucial to this process have not been fully elucidated. We reveal that a subset of NTS neurons containing cholecystokinin (CCKNTS) is responsive to nutritional state and that their activation reduces appetite and body weight in mice. Cell-specific anterograde tracing revealed that CCKNTS neurons provide a distinctive innervation of the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus (PVH), with fibers and varicosities in close apposition to a subset of melanocortin-4 receptor (MC4RPVH) cells, which are also responsive to CCK. Optogenetic activation of CCKNTS axon terminals within the PVH reveal the satiating function of CCKNTS neurons to be mediated by a CCKNTS→PVH pathway that also encodes positive valence. These data identify the functional significance of CCKNTS neurons and reveal a sufficient and discrete NTS to hypothalamic circuit controlling appetite.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Giuseppe D'Agostino

    Rowett Institute of Nutrition and Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. David Joseph Lyons

    Rowett Institute of Nutrition and Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Claudia Cristiano

    Rowett Institute of Nutrition and Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Luke Kennedy Burke

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Joseph C Madara

    Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. John N Campbell

    Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Ana Paula Garcia

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Benjamin Bruce Land

    Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Bradford B Lowell

    Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Ralph Joseph Dileone

    Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Lora K Heisler

    Rowett Institute of Nutrition and Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    lora.heisler@abdn.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experimental procedures were performed in accordance with the UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (Project License No. 60/4565).

Copyright

© 2016, D'Agostino 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

  • 8,388
    views
  • 1,525
    downloads
  • 142
    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. Giuseppe D'Agostino
  2. David Joseph Lyons
  3. Claudia Cristiano
  4. Luke Kennedy Burke
  5. Joseph C Madara
  6. John N Campbell
  7. Ana Paula Garcia
  8. Benjamin Bruce Land
  9. Bradford B Lowell
  10. Ralph Joseph Dileone
  11. Lora K Heisler
(2016)
Appetite controlled by a cholecystokinin nucleus of the solitary tract to hypothalamus neurocircuit
eLife 5:e12225.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12225

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12225

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Moritz F Wurm, Doruk Yiğit Erigüç
    Research Article

    Recognizing goal-directed actions is a computationally challenging task, requiring not only the visual analysis of body movements, but also analysis of how these movements causally impact, and thereby induce a change in, those objects targeted by an action. We tested the hypothesis that the analysis of body movements and the effects they induce relies on distinct neural representations in superior and anterior inferior parietal lobe (SPL and aIPL). In four fMRI sessions, participants observed videos of actions (e.g. breaking stick, squashing plastic bottle) along with corresponding point-light-display (PLD) stick figures, pantomimes, and abstract animations of agent–object interactions (e.g. dividing or compressing a circle). Cross-decoding between actions and animations revealed that aIPL encodes abstract representations of action effect structures independent of motion and object identity. By contrast, cross-decoding between actions and PLDs revealed that SPL is disproportionally tuned to body movements independent of visible interactions with objects. Lateral occipitotemporal cortex (LOTC) was sensitive to both action effects and body movements. These results demonstrate that parietal cortex and LOTC are tuned to physical action features, such as how body parts move in space relative to each other and how body parts interact with objects to induce a change (e.g. in position or shape/configuration). The high level of abstraction revealed by cross-decoding suggests a general neural code supporting mechanical reasoning about how entities interact with, and have effects on, each other.

    1. Neuroscience
    Magdalena Solyga, Georg B Keller
    Research Article

    Our movements result in predictable sensory feedback that is often multimodal. Based on deviations between predictions and actual sensory input, primary sensory areas of cortex have been shown to compute sensorimotor prediction errors. How prediction errors in one sensory modality influence the computation of prediction errors in another modality is still unclear. To investigate multimodal prediction errors in mouse auditory cortex, we used a virtual environment to experimentally couple running to both self-generated auditory and visual feedback. Using two-photon microscopy, we first characterized responses of layer 2/3 (L2/3) neurons to sounds, visual stimuli, and running onsets and found responses to all three stimuli. Probing responses evoked by audiomotor (AM) mismatches, we found that they closely resemble visuomotor (VM) mismatch responses in visual cortex (V1). Finally, testing for cross modal influence on AM mismatch responses by coupling both sound amplitude and visual flow speed to the speed of running, we found that AM mismatch responses were amplified when paired with concurrent VM mismatches. Our results demonstrate that multimodal and non-hierarchical interactions shape prediction error responses in cortical L2/3.