Drosophila PSI controls circadian period and the phase of circadian behavior under temperature cycle via tim splicing

  1. Lauren Foley
  2. Jinli Ling
  3. Radhika Joshi
  4. Naveh Evantal
  5. Sebastian Kadener
  6. Patrick Emery  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Massachusetts Medical School, United States
  2. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
  3. Brandeis University, United States

Abstract

The Drosophila circadian pacemaker consists of transcriptional feedback loops subjected to post-transcriptional and post-translational regulation. While post-translational regulatory mechanisms have been studied in detail, much less is known about circadian post-transcriptional control. Thus, we targeted 364 RNA binding and RNA associated proteins with RNA interference. Among the 43 hits we identified was the alternative splicing regulator P-element somatic inhibitor (PSI). PSI regulates the thermosensitive alternative splicing of timeless (tim), promoting splicing events favored at warm temperature over those increased at cold temperature. Psi downregulation shortens the period of circadian rhythms and advances the phase of circadian behavior under temperature cycle. Interestingly, both phenotypes were suppressed in flies that could produce TIM proteins only from a transgene that cannot form the thermosensitive splicing isoforms. Therefore, we conclude that PSI regulates the period of Drosophila circadian rhythms and circadian behavior phase during temperature cycling through its modulation of the tim splicing pattern.

Data availability

All source data are included in this submission

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Lauren Foley

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jinli Ling

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Radhika Joshi

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Naveh Evantal

    Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sebastian Kadener

    Biology Department, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0080-5987
  6. Patrick Emery

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    For correspondence
    Patrick.Emery@umassmed.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5176-6565

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (1R35GM118087)

  • Patrick Emery

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (1R01GM125859)

  • Sebastian Kadener

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

Copyright

© 2019, Foley 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

  • 1,645
    views
  • 256
    downloads
  • 28
    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. Lauren Foley
  2. Jinli Ling
  3. Radhika Joshi
  4. Naveh Evantal
  5. Sebastian Kadener
  6. Patrick Emery
(2019)
Drosophila PSI controls circadian period and the phase of circadian behavior under temperature cycle via tim splicing
eLife 8:e50063.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.50063

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.50063

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Sergio Casas-Tinto, Nuria Garcia-Guillen, María Losada-Perez
    Short Report

    As the global population ages, the prevalence of neurodegenerative disorders is fast increasing. This neurodegeneration as well as other central nervous system (CNS) injuries cause permanent disabilities. Thus, generation of new neurons is the rosetta stone in contemporary neuroscience. Glial cells support CNS homeostasis through evolutionary conserved mechanisms. Upon damage, glial cells activate an immune and inflammatory response to clear the injury site from debris and proliferate to restore cell number. This glial regenerative response (GRR) is mediated by the neuropil-associated glia (NG) in Drosophila, equivalent to vertebrate astrocytes, oligodendrocytes (OL), and oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (OPCs). Here, we examine the contribution of NG lineages and the GRR in response to injury. The results indicate that NG exchanges identities between ensheathing glia (EG) and astrocyte-like glia (ALG). Additionally, we found that NG cells undergo transdifferentiation to yield neurons. Moreover, this transdifferentiation increases in injury conditions. Thus, these data demonstrate that glial cells are able to generate new neurons through direct transdifferentiation. The present work makes a fundamental contribution to the CNS regeneration field and describes a new physiological mechanism to generate new neurons.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Ev L Nichols, Joo Lee, Kang Shen
    Research Article

    During development axons undergo long-distance migrations as instructed by guidance molecules and their receptors, such as UNC-6/Netrin and UNC-40/DCC. Guidance cues act through long-range diffusive gradients (chemotaxis) or local adhesion (haptotaxis). However, how these discrete modes of action guide axons in vivo is poorly understood. Using time-lapse imaging of axon guidance in C. elegans, we demonstrate that UNC-6 and UNC-40 are required for local adhesion to an intermediate target and subsequent directional growth. Exogenous membrane-tethered UNC-6 is sufficient to mediate adhesion but not directional growth, demonstrating the separability of haptotaxis and chemotaxis. This conclusion is further supported by the endogenous UNC-6 distribution along the axon’s route. The intermediate and final targets are enriched in UNC-6 and separated by a ventrodorsal UNC-6 gradient. Continuous growth through the gradient requires UNC-40, which recruits UNC-6 to the growth cone tip. Overall, these data suggest that UNC-6 stimulates stepwise haptotaxis and chemotaxis in vivo.