A Cryptochrome 2 Mutation Yields Advanced Sleep Phase in Human

  1. Arisa Hirano
  2. Guangsen Shi
  3. Christopher R Jones
  4. Anna Lipzen
  5. Len A Pennacchio
  6. Ying Xu
  7. William C Hallows
  8. Thomas McMahon
  9. Maya Yamazaki
  10. Louis J Ptáček  Is a corresponding author
  11. Ying-Hui Fu  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California San Francisco, United States
  2. University of California, San Francisco, United States
  3. University of Utah, United States
  4. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, United States
  5. Soochow University, China

Abstract

Familial Advanced Sleep Phase (FASP) is a heritable human sleep phenotype characterized by very early sleep and wake times. We identified a missense mutation in the human Cryptochrome 2 (CRY2) gene that co-segregates with FASP in one family. The mutation leads to replacement of an alanine residue at position 260 with a threonine (A260T). In mice, the CRY2 mutation causes a shortened circadian period and reduced phase-shift to early-night light pulse associated with phase-advanced behavioral rhythms in the light-dark cycle. The A260T mutation is located in the phosphate loop of the flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD) binding domain of CRY2. The mutation alters the conformation of CRY2, increasing its accessibility and affinity for FBXL3 (an E3 ubiquitin ligase), thus promoting its degradation. These results demonstrate that CRY2 stability controlled by FBXL3 plays a key role in the regulation of human sleep wake behavior.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Arisa Hirano

    Department of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Guangsen Shi

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Christopher R Jones

    Department of Neurology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Anna Lipzen

    Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Walnut Creek, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Len A Pennacchio

    DOE Joint Genome Institute, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Walnut Creek, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Ying Xu

    Center for System Biology, Soochow University, Suzhou, China
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6689-7768
  7. William C Hallows

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8306-8438
  8. Thomas McMahon

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Maya Yamazaki

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Louis J Ptáček

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    ljp@ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    Louis J Ptáček, Reviewing editor, eLife.
  11. Ying-Hui Fu

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    ying-hui.fu@ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6628-0266

Funding

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL059596)

  • Louis J Ptáček

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM079180)

  • Ying-Hui Fu

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science

  • Arisa Hirano

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experimental protocols (Protocol no. AN111686-02) were conducted according to US National Institutes of Health guidelines for animal research andwere approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of California, San Francisco.

Human subjects: All human subjects signed a consent form approved by the Institutional Review Boards at the University of Utah and the University of California, San Francisco (IRB# 10-03952). The consent form includes all confidentiality and ethic guidelines and also indicates not revealing subject information in the publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Joseph G Gleeson, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, The Rockefeller University, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: April 6, 2016
  2. Accepted: August 14, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 16, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: September 6, 2016 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: September 7, 2016 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2016, Hirano 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

  • 3,404
    Page views
  • 746
    Downloads
  • 76
    Citations

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

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. Arisa Hirano
  2. Guangsen Shi
  3. Christopher R Jones
  4. Anna Lipzen
  5. Len A Pennacchio
  6. Ying Xu
  7. William C Hallows
  8. Thomas McMahon
  9. Maya Yamazaki
  10. Louis J Ptáček
  11. Ying-Hui Fu
(2016)
A Cryptochrome 2 Mutation Yields Advanced Sleep Phase in Human
eLife 5:e16695.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16695

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Sudeshna Das Chakraborty et al.
    Research Article

    Understanding neuronal representations of odor-evoked activities and their progressive transformation from the sensory level to higher brain centers features one of the major aims in olfactory neuroscience. Here, we investigated how odor information is transformed and represented in higher-order neurons of the lateral horn, one of the higher olfactory centers implicated in determining innate behavior, using Drosophila melanogaster. We focused on a subset of third-order glutamatergic lateral horn neurons (LHNs) and characterized their odor coding properties in relation to their presynaptic partner neurons, the projection neurons (PNs) by two-photon functional imaging. We show that odors evoke reproducible, stereotypic, and odor-specific response patterns in LHNs. Notably, odor-evoked responses in these neurons are valence-specific in a way that their response amplitude is positively correlated with innate odor preferences. We postulate that this valence-specific activity is the result of integrating inputs from multiple olfactory channels through second-order neurons. GRASP and micro-lesioning experiments provide evidence that glutamatergic LHNs obtain their major excitatory input from uniglomerular PNs, while they receive an odor-specific inhibition through inhibitory multiglomerular PNs. In summary, our study indicates that odor representations in glutamatergic LHNs encode hedonic valence and odor identity and primarily retain the odor coding properties of second-order neurons.

    1. Neuroscience
    Shreya Saxena et al.
    Research Article

    Learned movements can be skillfully performed at different paces. What neural strategies produce this flexibility? Can they be predicted and understood by network modeling? We trained monkeys to perform a cycling task at different speeds, and trained artificial recurrent networks to generate the empirical muscle-activity patterns. Network solutions reflected the principle that smooth well-behaved dynamics require low trajectory tangling. Network solutions had a consistent form, which yielded quantitative and qualitative predictions. To evaluate predictions, we analyzed motor cortex activity recorded during the same task. Responses supported the hypothesis that the dominant neural signals reflect not muscle activity, but network-level strategies for generating muscle activity. Single-neuron responses were better accounted for by network activity than by muscle activity. Similarly, neural population trajectories shared their organization not with muscle trajectories, but with network solutions. Thus, cortical activity could be understood based on the need to generate muscle activity via dynamics that allow smooth, robust control over movement speed.