Thermoregulation: How a brain keeps its cool
Temperature-sensing neurons in the Drosophila brain cooperate with the central circadian clock to help regulate body temperature.
- University of Michigan, United States
Keeping body temperature within a certain range is essential for nearly all animals. Endothermic animals can generate their own heat and maintain a fixed body temperature, even when the temperature of their environment changes. Nevertheless, their core body temperature fluctuates modestly but predictably throughout the day, due to programmed changes in heat production and loss (Kräuchi and Wirz-Justice, 1994). In humans, for example, the core body temperature is lowest late at night (Aschoff, 1983). These daily changes are driven by a central circadian clock in the brain and they serve as important signals, both to synchronize other circadian clocks throughout the body (Buhr et al., 2010) and to ensure that we sleep at night (Kräuchi and Wirz-Justice, 2001).
Ectothermic animals, on the other hand, cannot produce their own heat, so their body temperature is determined by their environment. However, they have evolved different strategies to regulate their temperature. Iguanas, for example, vary their daily temperature by changing their level of activity throughout the day and also by moving around to take advantage of the different ambient temperatures within their environment (Tosini and Menaker, 1995). Thus, daily variations and rhythms in body temperature can be found in both endothermic and ectothermic animals, suggesting that they are a fundamental adaptation to life on a revolving planet.
Now, in eLife, Fumika Hamada and colleagues – including Xin Tang of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center as first author – report new insights into the regulation of body temperature in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster (Tang et al., 2017). Previous work from the Hamada lab established that D. melanogaster, which is ectothermic, has a daily temperature preference rhythm. By switching its preference from higher temperatures during the day to lower temperatures at night, it produces daily body temperature rhythms similar to those seen in endothermic animals (Kaneko et al., 2012).
Drosophila has a relatively simple network of approximately 150 circadian clock neurons that are organized into distinct groups (Nitabach and Taghert, 2008). Each neuron has its own circadian clock, and together they form a network that serves as the master circadian pacemaker in the fly. The Hamada lab has previously shown that a small class of clock neurons, the dorsal neuron 2 group (or DN2s for short), regulate the temperature preference rhythm in the fly (Kaneko et al., 2012). Based on these findings, Tang et al. sought to identify the underlying neural pathways.
First, they revealed that a group of neurons called small ventral lateral clock neurons, which drive the fly’s pre-dawn bout of activity (Renn et al., 1999; Stoleru et al., 2004; Grima et al., 2004), are also required for setting the temperature preference in the hours preceding dawn. When these ventral lateral neurons were disrupted, the flies preferred abnormally low temperatures just before dawn. By contrast, when DN2s were disrupted, the flies preferred lower temperatures throughout their entire 24 hour-circadian cycle.
Tang et al. then examined whether these two groups of neurons are connected and, if so, how connections change during the course of the circadian cycle. They discovered that the projections of the ventral lateral neurons terminate next to those of the DN2s and that ventral lateral neurons excite the DN2s. The number of the neural connections between the two groups of neurons increased significantly throughout the night, peaking just before dawn and falling throughout the day. This suggests that the previously discovered morphological modifications of the ventral lateral neurons, such as the expansion and contraction of their axon terminals (Fernández et al., 2008), may cause the changes in thermal preference over the course of the day.
The researchers – who are based in Cincinnati, London and Japan – next addressed how external temperature and time of day are integrated in the brain to produce a temperature preference rhythm. This was guided by previous work, which had established that a group of neurons in the central brain called anterior cell neurons act as internal heat sensors (Hamada et al., 2008). Now, Tang et al. provide compelling evidence that these anterior cells modulate the ventral lateral neurons to regulate temperature preference before dawn; when the anterior cells were blocked, the fly’s preferred temperature was lowered. Thus, they have revealed a simple neural circuitry that drives the fly’s temperature preference rhythm. Within this network, the temperature-sensing anterior cells modulate ventral lateral neurons, which in turn activate the DN2s to elevate the preferred temperature before dawn.
The fly can use daily changes in the surrounding temperature as a cue to adjust its near 24-hour endogenous period and sleep-activity cycle to match the precise 24-hour light-dark cycle (Wheeler et al., 1993). Remarkably, the temperature-sensitive pathway implicated by Tang et al. does not appear to help adjust the central clock to daily temperature cycles. Thus, Drosophila seems to rely on distinct temperature-sensing pathways to produce and adjust to daily temperature rhythms.
By identifying the neural pathways underlying the daily regulation of temperature preference, Tang, Hamada and colleagues have revealed how the fly’s brain can generate a predictable daily body temperature rhythm – a remarkable feat for a such a small ‘thermoconformer’ that constantly has to face unpredictable temperature changes.
References
-
Circadian control of body temperatureJournal of Thermal Biology 8:143–147.https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4565(83)90094-3
-
Circadian rhythm of heat production, heart rate, and skin and core temperature under unmasking conditions in menAmerican Journal of Physiology 267:819–829.
-
Circadian clues to sleep onset mechanismsNeuropsychopharmacology 25:S92–S96.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0893-133X(01)00315-3
-
Organization of the Drosophila circadian control circuitCurrent Biology 18:R84–R93.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.11.061
-
Circadian rhythm of body temperature in an ectotherm (Iguana iguana)Journal of Biological Rhythms 10:248–255.https://doi.org/10.1177/074873049501000307
-
Behavior in light-dark cycles of Drosophila mutants that are arrhythmic, blind, or bothJournal of Biological Rhythms 8:67–94.https://doi.org/10.1177/074873049300800106
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
- Version of Record published: May 30, 2017 (version 1)
- Version of Record updated: June 8, 2017 (version 2)
Copyright
© 2017, Yadlapalli et al.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 2,362
- views
-
- 228
- downloads
-
- 1
- 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)
Thermoregulation: How a brain keeps its cool
eLife 6:e28109.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.28109
Further reading
-
- Neuroscience
Biological synaptic transmission is unreliable, and this unreliability likely degrades neural circuit performance. While there are biophysical mechanisms that can increase reliability, for instance by increasing vesicle release probability, these mechanisms cost energy. We examined four such mechanisms along with the associated scaling of the energetic costs. We then embedded these energetic costs for reliability in artificial neural networks (ANNs) with trainable stochastic synapses, and trained these networks on standard image classification tasks. The resulting networks revealed a tradeoff between circuit performance and the energetic cost of synaptic reliability. Additionally, the optimised networks exhibited two testable predictions consistent with pre-existing experimental data. Specifically, synapses with lower variability tended to have (1) higher input firing rates and (2) lower learning rates. Surprisingly, these predictions also arise when synapse statistics are inferred through Bayesian inference. Indeed, we were able to find a formal, theoretical link between the performance-reliability cost tradeoff and Bayesian inference. This connection suggests two incompatible possibilities: evolution may have chanced upon a scheme for implementing Bayesian inference by optimising energy efficiency, or alternatively, energy-efficient synapses may display signatures of Bayesian inference without actually using Bayes to reason about uncertainty.
-
- Neuroscience
Resting-state brain networks (RSNs) have been widely applied in health and disease, but the interpretation of RSNs in terms of the underlying neural activity is unclear. To address this fundamental question, we conducted simultaneous recordings of whole-brain resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) and electrophysiology signals in two separate brain regions of rats. Our data reveal that for both recording sites, spatial maps derived from band-specific local field potential (LFP) power can account for up to 90% of the spatial variability in RSNs derived from rsfMRI signals. Surprisingly, the time series of LFP band power can only explain to a maximum of 35% of the temporal variance of the local rsfMRI time course from the same site. In addition, regressing out time series of LFP power from rsfMRI signals has minimal impact on the spatial patterns of rsfMRI-based RSNs. This disparity in the spatial and temporal relationships between resting-state electrophysiology and rsfMRI signals suggests that electrophysiological activity alone does not fully explain the effects observed in the rsfMRI signal, implying the existence of an rsfMRI component contributed by ‘electrophysiology-invisible’ signals. These findings offer a novel perspective on our understanding of RSN interpretation.
