1. Neuroscience
Download icon

Reactive oxygen species regulate activity-dependent neuronal plasticity in Drosophila

  1. Matthew C W Oswald  Is a corresponding author
  2. Paul S Brooks
  3. Maarten F Zwart
  4. Amrita Mukherjee
  5. Ryan J H West
  6. Carlo N G Giachello
  7. Khomgrit Morarach
  8. Richard A Baines
  9. Sean T Sweeney
  10. Matthias Landgraf  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
  2. Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States
  3. University of Manchester, United Kingdom
  4. University of York, United Kingdom
Research Article
  • Cited 14
  • Views 4,515
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2018;7:e39393 doi: 10.7554/eLife.39393

Abstract

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) have been extensively studied as damaging agents associated with ageing and neurodegenerative conditions. Their role in the nervous system under non-pathological conditions has remained poorly understood. Working with the Drosophila larval locomotor network, we show that in neurons ROS act as obligate signals required for neuronal activity-dependent structural plasticity, of both pre- and postsynaptic terminals. ROS signaling is also necessary for maintaining evoked synaptic transmission at the neuromuscular junction, and for activity-regulated homeostatic adjustment of motor network output, as measured by larval crawling behavior. We identified the highly conserved Parkinson's disease-linked protein DJ-1ß as a redox sensor in neurons where it regulates structural plasticity, in part via modulation of the PTEN-PI3Kinase pathway. This study provides a new conceptual framework of neuronal ROS as second messengers required for neuronal plasticity and for network tuning, whose dysregulation in the ageing brain and under neurodegenerative conditions may contribute to synaptic dysfunction.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Matthew C W Oswald

    Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    mo364@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8586-9351
  2. Paul S Brooks

    Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Maarten F Zwart

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Amrita Mukherjee

    Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ryan J H West

    Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9873-2258
  6. Carlo N G Giachello

    Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Khomgrit Morarach

    Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Richard A Baines

    Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8571-4376
  9. Sean T Sweeney

    Department of Biology, University of York, York, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Matthias Landgraf

    Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    ml10006@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5142-1997

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/I01179X/1)

  • Matthias Landgraf

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/M002934/1)

  • Matthias Landgraf

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/I012273/1)

  • Sean T Sweeney

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/M002322/1)

  • Sean T Sweeney

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/N/014561/1)

  • Richard A Baines

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Graeme W Davis, University of California, San Francisco, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: June 20, 2018
  2. Accepted: December 12, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 12, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: December 17, 2018 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: December 27, 2018 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2018, Oswald 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

  • 4,515
    Page views
  • 621
    Downloads
  • 14
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Scopus, Crossref, 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)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Shenghong He et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Previous studies have explored neurofeedback training for Parkinsonian patients to suppress beta oscillations in the subthalamic nucleus (STN). However, its impacts on movements and Parkinsonian tremor are unclear. We developed a neurofeedback paradigm targeting STN beta bursts and investigated whether neurofeedback training could improve motor initiation in Parkinson’s disease compared to passive observation. Our task additionally allowed us to test which endogenous changes in oscillatory STN activities are associated with trial-to-trial motor performance. Neurofeedback training reduced beta synchrony and increased gamma activity within the STN, and reduced beta band coupling between the STN and motor cortex. These changes were accompanied by reduced reaction times in subsequently cued movements. However, in Parkinsonian patients with pre-existing symptoms of tremor, successful volitional beta suppression was associated with an amplification of tremor which correlated with theta band activity in STN local field potentials, suggesting an additional cross-frequency interaction between STN beta and theta activities.

    1. Neuroscience
    2. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Julien G Roth et al.
    Tools and Resources Updated

    Microdeletions and microduplications of the 16p11.2 chromosomal locus are associated with syndromic neurodevelopmental disorders and reciprocal physiological conditions such as macro/microcephaly and high/low body mass index. To facilitate cellular and molecular investigations into these phenotypes, 65 clones of human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) were generated from 13 individuals with 16p11.2 copy number variations (CNVs). To ensure these cell lines were suitable for downstream mechanistic investigations, a customizable bioinformatic strategy for the detection of random integration and expression of reprogramming vectors was developed and leveraged towards identifying a subset of ‘footprint’-free hiPSC clones. Transcriptomic profiling of cortical neural progenitor cells derived from these hiPSCs identified alterations in gene expression patterns which precede morphological abnormalities reported at later neurodevelopmental stages. Interpreting clinical information—available with the cell lines by request from the Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative—with this transcriptional data revealed disruptions in gene programs related to both nervous system function and cellular metabolism. As demonstrated by these analyses, this publicly available resource has the potential to serve as a powerful medium for probing the etiology of developmental disorders associated with 16p11.2 CNVs.