Nociceptive interneurons control modular motor pathways to promote escape behavior in Drosophila

  1. Anita Burgos  Is a corresponding author
  2. Ken Honjo
  3. Tomoko Ohyama
  4. Cheng Sam Qian
  5. Grace Ji-eun Shin
  6. Daryl M Gohl
  7. Marion Silies
  8. W Daniel Tracey
  9. Marta Zlatic
  10. Albert Cardona
  11. Wesley B Grueber  Is a corresponding author
  1. Columbia University Medical Center, United States
  2. University of Tsukuba, Japan
  3. McGill University, Canada
  4. University of Minnesota Genomics Center, United States
  5. European Neuroscience Institute, Germany
  6. Indiana University, United States
  7. Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States

Abstract

Rapid and efficient escape behaviors in response to noxious sensory stimuli are essential for protection and survival. Yet, how noxious stimuli are transformed to coordinated escape behaviors remains poorly understood. In Drosophila larvae, noxious stimuli trigger sequential body bending and corkscrew-like rolling behavior. We identified a population of interneurons in the nerve cord of Drosophila, termed Down-and-Back (DnB) neurons, that are activated by noxious heat, promote nociceptive behavior, and are required for robust escape responses to noxious stimuli. Electron microscopic circuit reconstruction shows that DnBs are targets of nociceptive and mechanosensory neurons, are directly presynaptic to pre-motor circuits, and link indirectly to Goro rolling command-like neurons. DnB activation promotes activity in Goro neurons, and coincident inactivation of Goro neurons prevents the rolling sequence but leaves intact body bending motor responses. Thus, activity from nociceptors to DnB interneurons coordinates modular elements of nociceptive escape behavior.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Anita Burgos

    Department of Neuroscience, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    ab3271@columbia.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Ken Honjo

    Faculty of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Tomoko Ohyama

    Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Cheng Sam Qian

    Department of Neuroscience, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Grace Ji-eun Shin

    Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Daryl M Gohl

    University of Minnesota Genomics Center, Minneapolis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Marion Silies

    European Neuroscience Institute, Göttingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. W Daniel Tracey

    The Linda and Jack Gill Center for Biomolecular Science, Indiana University, Bloomington, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4666-8199
  9. Marta Zlatic

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Albert Cardona

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4941-6536
  11. Wesley B Grueber

    Department of Neuroscience, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    wg2135@columbia.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6751-256X

Funding

National Science Foundation (Graduate Research Fellowship)

  • Anita Burgos

National Institutes of Health (NS090909-01)

  • Anita Burgos

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Marta Zlatic

National Institutes of Health (NS061908)

  • Wesley B Grueber

National Institutes of Health (GM086458)

  • W Daniel Tracey

National Institutes of Health (NS086564)

  • Wesley B Grueber

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Albert Cardona

Thompson Family Foundation (Innovation Award)

  • Grace Ji-eun Shin
  • Wesley B Grueber

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

Copyright

© 2018, Burgos 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

  • 6,418
    views
  • 811
    downloads
  • 81
    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. Anita Burgos
  2. Ken Honjo
  3. Tomoko Ohyama
  4. Cheng Sam Qian
  5. Grace Ji-eun Shin
  6. Daryl M Gohl
  7. Marion Silies
  8. W Daniel Tracey
  9. Marta Zlatic
  10. Albert Cardona
  11. Wesley B Grueber
(2018)
Nociceptive interneurons control modular motor pathways to promote escape behavior in Drosophila
eLife 7:e26016.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26016

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26016

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Lisa Reisinger, Gianpaolo Demarchi ... Nathan Weisz
    Research Article

    Phantom perceptions like tinnitus occur without any identifiable environmental or bodily source. The mechanisms and key drivers behind tinnitus are poorly understood. The dominant framework, suggesting that tinnitus results from neural hyperactivity in the auditory pathway following hearing damage, has been difficult to investigate in humans and has reached explanatory limits. As a result, researchers have tried to explain perceptual and potential neural aberrations in tinnitus within a more parsimonious predictive-coding framework. In two independent magnetoencephalography studies, participants passively listened to sequences of pure tones with varying levels of regularity (i.e. predictability) ranging from random to ordered. Aside from being a replication of the first study, the pre-registered second study, including 80 participants, ensured rigorous matching of hearing status, as well as age, sex, and hearing loss, between individuals with and without tinnitus. Despite some changes in the details of the paradigm, both studies equivalently reveal a group difference in neural representation, based on multivariate pattern analysis, of upcoming stimuli before their onset. These data strongly suggest that individuals with tinnitus engage anticipatory auditory predictions differently to controls. While the observation of different predictive processes is robust and replicable, the precise neurocognitive mechanism underlying it calls for further, ideally longitudinal, studies to establish its role as a potential contributor to, and/or consequence of, tinnitus.

    1. Neuroscience
    Sam E Benezra, Kripa B Patel ... Randy M Bruno
    Research Article

    Learning alters cortical representations and improves perception. Apical tuft dendrites in cortical layer 1, which are unique in their connectivity and biophysical properties, may be a key site of learning-induced plasticity. We used both two-photon and SCAPE microscopy to longitudinally track tuft-wide calcium spikes in apical dendrites of layer 5 pyramidal neurons in barrel cortex as mice learned a tactile behavior. Mice were trained to discriminate two orthogonal directions of whisker stimulation. Reinforcement learning, but not repeated stimulus exposure, enhanced tuft selectivity for both directions equally, even though only one was associated with reward. Selective tufts emerged from initially unresponsive or low-selectivity populations. Animal movement and choice did not account for changes in stimulus selectivity. Enhanced selectivity persisted even after rewards were removed and animals ceased performing the task. We conclude that learning produces long-lasting realignment of apical dendrite tuft responses to behaviorally relevant dimensions of a task.