Activity of the C. elegans egg-laying behavior circuit is controlled by competing activation and feedback inhibition

  1. Kevin M Collins  Is a corresponding author
  2. Addys Bode
  3. Robert W Fernandez
  4. Jessica E Tanis
  5. Jacob C Brewer
  6. Matthew S Creamer
  7. Michael R Koelle
  1. University of Miami, United States
  2. Yale University, United States

Abstract

Like many behaviors, Caenorhabditis elegans egg laying alternates between inactive and active states. To understand how the underlying neural circuit turns the behavior on and off, we optically recorded circuit activity in behaving animals while manipulating circuit function using mutations, optogenetics, and drugs. In the active state, the circuit shows rhythmic activity phased with the body bends of locomotion. The serotonergic HSN command neurons initiate the active state, but accumulation of unlaid eggs also promotes the active state independent of the HSNs. The cholinergic VC motor neurons slow locomotion during egg-laying muscle contraction and egg release. The uv1 neuroendocrine cells mechanically sense passage of eggs through the vulva and release tyramine to inhibit egg laying, in part via the LGC-55 tyramine-gated Cl- channel on the HSNs. Our results identify discrete signals that entrain or detach the circuit from the locomotion central pattern generator to produce active and inactive states.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Kevin M Collins

    Department of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables, United States
    For correspondence
    kcollins@bio.miami.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9930-0924
  2. Addys Bode

    Department of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Robert W Fernandez

    Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jessica E Tanis

    Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jacob C Brewer

    Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2780-2874
  6. Matthew S Creamer

    Interdepartmental Neuroscience Program, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Michael R Koelle

    Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9486-8481

Funding

American Heart Association (Postdoctoral Fellowship, POST4990016)

  • Kevin M Collins

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS086932)

  • Kevin M Collins
  • Michael R Koelle

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS036918)

  • Michael R Koelle

Yale Liver Center (DK34989)

  • Kevin M Collins

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Oliver Hobert, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Columbia University, United States

Version history

  1. Received: August 31, 2016
  2. Accepted: November 14, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 16, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: December 7, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Collins 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

  • 6,821
    views
  • 721
    downloads
  • 70
    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. Kevin M Collins
  2. Addys Bode
  3. Robert W Fernandez
  4. Jessica E Tanis
  5. Jacob C Brewer
  6. Matthew S Creamer
  7. Michael R Koelle
(2016)
Activity of the C. elegans egg-laying behavior circuit is controlled by competing activation and feedback inhibition
eLife 5:e21126.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21126

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21126

Further reading

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    2. Neuroscience
    Kenneth Chiou, Noah Snyder-Mackler
    Insight

    Single-cell RNA sequencing reveals the extent to which marmosets carry genetically distinct cells from their siblings.

    1. Neuroscience
    Flavio J Schmidig, Simon Ruch, Katharina Henke
    Research Article

    We are unresponsive during slow-wave sleep but continue monitoring external events for survival. Our brain wakens us when danger is imminent. If events are non-threatening, our brain might store them for later consideration to improve decision-making. To test this hypothesis, we examined whether novel vocabulary consisting of simultaneously played pseudowords and translation words are encoded/stored during sleep, and which neural-electrical events facilitate encoding/storage. An algorithm for brain-state-dependent stimulation selectively targeted word pairs to slow-wave peaks or troughs. Retrieval tests were given 12 and 36 hr later. These tests required decisions regarding the semantic category of previously sleep-played pseudowords. The sleep-played vocabulary influenced awake decision-making 36 hr later, if targeted to troughs. The words’ linguistic processing raised neural complexity. The words’ semantic-associative encoding was supported by increased theta power during the ensuing peak. Fast-spindle power ramped up during a second peak likely aiding consolidation. Hence, new vocabulary played during slow-wave sleep was stored and influenced decision-making days later.