Antinociceptive modulation by the adhesion GPCR CIRL promotes mechanosensory signal discrimination

  1. Sven Dannhäuser
  2. Thomas J Lux
  3. Chun Hu
  4. Mareike Selcho
  5. Jeremy T-C Chen
  6. Nadine Ehmann
  7. Divya Sachidanandan
  8. Sarah Stopp
  9. Dennis Pauls
  10. Matthias Pawlak
  11. Tobias Langenhan
  12. Peter Soba
  13. Heike L Rittner  Is a corresponding author
  14. Robert J Kittel  Is a corresponding author
  1. Leipzig University, Germany
  2. University Hospital Würzburg, Germany
  3. University of Hamburg, Germany
  4. University of Würzburg, Germany
  5. University Hopsitals of Wuerzburg, Germany

Abstract

Adhesion-type GPCRs (aGPCRs) participate in a vast range of physiological processes. Their frequent association with mechanosensitive functions suggests that processing of mechanical stimuli may be a common feature of this receptor family. Previously, we reported that the Drosophila aGPCR CIRL sensitizes sensory responses to gentle touch and sound by amplifying signal transduction in low-threshold mechanoreceptors (Scholz et al., 2017). Here, we show that Cirl is also expressed in high-threshold mechanical nociceptors where it adjusts nocifensive behaviour under physiological and pathological conditions. Optogenetic in vivo experiments indicate that CIRL lowers cAMP levels in both mechanosensory submodalities. However, contrasting its role in touch-sensitive neurons, CIRL dampens the response of nociceptors to mechanical stimulation. Consistent with this finding, rat nociceptors display decreased Cirl1 expression during allodynia. Thus, cAMP-downregulation by CIRL exerts opposing effects on low-threshold mechanosensors and high-threshold nociceptors. This intriguing bipolar action facilitates the separation of mechanosensory signals carrying different physiological information.

Data availability

The presented data are summarized in Tables 1-3.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sven Dannhäuser

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Thomas J Lux

    Center for Interdisciplinary Pain Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1049-9872
  3. Chun Hu

    Center for Molecular Neurobiology, University Medical Campus, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Mareike Selcho

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jeremy T-C Chen

    Center for Interdisciplinary Pain Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Nadine Ehmann

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Divya Sachidanandan

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8219-8177
  8. Sarah Stopp

    Department of Animal Physiology, Institute of Biology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Dennis Pauls

    Department of Animal Physiology, Institute of Biology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Matthias Pawlak

    Department of Neurophysiology, Institute of Physiology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Tobias Langenhan

    Rudolf-Schönheimer-Institute of Biochemistry, Division of General Biochemistry, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9061-3809
  12. Peter Soba

    Center for Molecular Neurobiology, University Medical Campus, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Heike L Rittner

    Anesthsiology, University Hopsitals of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
    For correspondence
    rittner_h@ukw.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Robert J Kittel

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    For correspondence
    rjkittel@me.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9199-4826

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (PA3241/2-1)

  • Mareike Selcho

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (RI817/13-1)

  • Heike L Rittner

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (FOR 2149/P03,TRR 166/B04,KI1460/4-1,KI1460/5-1)

  • Robert J Kittel

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SPP 1926/SO1337/2-2,SO1337/4-1)

  • Peter Soba

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (FOR 2149/P01 and P03)

  • Tobias Langenhan

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Hugo J Bellen, Baylor College of Medicine, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Animal care and protocols were performed in accordance with international guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals (EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments) and were approved by the Government of Unterfranken (protocol numbers 2-733 and 2-264).

Version history

  1. Received: March 13, 2020
  2. Accepted: September 17, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: September 30, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: October 9, 2020 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2020, Dannhäuser 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

  • 1,949
    views
  • 277
    downloads
  • 18
    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. Sven Dannhäuser
  2. Thomas J Lux
  3. Chun Hu
  4. Mareike Selcho
  5. Jeremy T-C Chen
  6. Nadine Ehmann
  7. Divya Sachidanandan
  8. Sarah Stopp
  9. Dennis Pauls
  10. Matthias Pawlak
  11. Tobias Langenhan
  12. Peter Soba
  13. Heike L Rittner
  14. Robert J Kittel
(2020)
Antinociceptive modulation by the adhesion GPCR CIRL promotes mechanosensory signal discrimination
eLife 9:e56738.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56738

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56738

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Zhaoran Zhang, Huijun Wang ... Kunlin Wei
    Research Article

    The sensorimotor system can recalibrate itself without our conscious awareness, a type of procedural learning whose computational mechanism remains undefined. Recent findings on implicit motor adaptation, such as over-learning from small perturbations and fast saturation for increasing perturbation size, challenge existing theories based on sensory errors. We argue that perceptual error, arising from the optimal combination of movement-related cues, is the primary driver of implicit adaptation. Central to our theory is the increasing sensory uncertainty of visual cues with increasing perturbations, which was validated through perceptual psychophysics (Experiment 1). Our theory predicts the learning dynamics of implicit adaptation across a spectrum of perturbation sizes on a trial-by-trial basis (Experiment 2). It explains proprioception changes and their relation to visual perturbation (Experiment 3). By modulating visual uncertainty in perturbation, we induced unique adaptation responses in line with our model predictions (Experiment 4). Overall, our perceptual error framework outperforms existing models based on sensory errors, suggesting that perceptual error in locating one’s effector, supported by Bayesian cue integration, underpins the sensorimotor system’s implicit adaptation.

    1. Neuroscience
    Alastair MacDonald, Alina Hebling ... Kevin Yackle
    Research Article

    Intonation in speech is the control of vocal pitch to layer expressive meaning to communication, like increasing pitch to indicate a question. Also, stereotyped patterns of pitch are used to create distinct sounds with different denotations, like in tonal languages and, perhaps, the 10 sounds in the murine lexicon. A basic tone is created by exhalation through a constricted laryngeal voice box, and it is thought that more complex utterances are produced solely by dynamic changes in laryngeal tension. But perhaps, the shifting pitch also results from altering the swiftness of exhalation. Consistent with the latter model, we describe that intonation in most vocalization types follows deviations in exhalation that appear to be generated by the re-activation of the cardinal breathing muscle for inspiration. We also show that the brainstem vocalization central pattern generator, the iRO, can create this breath pattern. Consequently, ectopic activation of the iRO not only induces phonation, but also the pitch patterns that compose most of the vocalizations in the murine lexicon. These results reveal a novel brainstem mechanism for intonation.