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.

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).

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

  • 2,119
    views
  • 292
    downloads
  • 19
    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
    Hendrik Heinbockel, Gregor Leicht ... Lars Schwabe
    Research Article

    When retrieved, seemingly stable memories can become sensitive to significant events, such as acute stress. The mechanisms underlying these memory dynamics remain poorly understood. Here, we show that noradrenergic stimulation after memory retrieval impairs subsequent remembering, depending on hippocampal and cortical signals emerging during retrieval. In a three-day study, we measured brain activity using fMRI during initial encoding, 24 hr-delayed memory cueing followed by pharmacological elevations of glucocorticoid or noradrenergic activity, and final recall. While post-retrieval glucocorticoids did not affect subsequent memory, the impairing effect of noradrenergic arousal on final recall depended on hippocampal reactivation and category-level reinstatement in the ventral temporal cortex during memory cueing. These effects did not require a reactivation of the original memory trace and did not interact with offline reinstatement during rest. Our findings demonstrate that, depending on the retrieval-related neural reactivation of memories, noradrenergic arousal after retrieval can alter the future accessibility of consolidated memories.

    1. Neuroscience
    Rituja S Bisen, Fathima Mukthar Iqbal ... Jan M Ache
    Research Article

    Insulin plays a key role in metabolic homeostasis. Drosophila insulin-producing cells (IPCs) are functional analogues of mammalian pancreatic beta cells and release insulin directly into circulation. To investigate the in vivo dynamics of IPC activity, we quantified the effects of nutritional and internal state changes on IPCs using electrophysiological recordings. We found that the nutritional state strongly modulates IPC activity. IPC activity decreased with increasing periods of starvation. Refeeding flies with glucose or fructose, two nutritive sugars, significantly increased IPC activity, whereas non-nutritive sugars had no effect. In contrast to feeding, glucose perfusion did not affect IPC activity. This was reminiscent of the mammalian incretin effect, where glucose ingestion drives higher insulin release than intravenous application. Contrary to IPCs, Diuretic hormone 44-expressing neurons in the pars intercerebralis (DH44PINs) responded to glucose perfusion. Functional connectivity experiments demonstrated that these DH44PINs do not affect IPC activity, while other DH44Ns inhibit them. Hence, populations of autonomously and systemically sugar-sensing neurons work in parallel to maintain metabolic homeostasis. Accordingly, activating IPCs had a small, satiety-like effect on food-searching behavior and reduced starvation-induced hyperactivity, whereas activating DH44Ns strongly increased hyperactivity. Taken together, we demonstrate that IPCs and DH44Ns are an integral part of a modulatory network that orchestrates glucose homeostasis and adaptive behavior in response to shifts in the metabolic state.