Control of feeding by Piezo-mediated gut mechanosensation in Drosophila

  1. Soohong Min
  2. Yangkyun Oh
  3. Pushpa Verma
  4. Samuel C Whitehead
  5. Nilay Yapici
  6. David Van Vactor
  7. Greg SB Suh
  8. Stephen Liberles  Is a corresponding author
  1. Harvard Medical School, United States
  2. Skirball Institute, NYU, United States
  3. Cornell University, United States

Abstract

Across animal species, meals are terminated after ingestion of large food volumes, yet underlying mechanosensory receptors have so far remained elusive. Here, we identify an essential role for Drosophila Piezo in volume-based control of meal size. We discover a rare population of fly neurons that express Piezo, innervate the anterior gut and crop (a food reservoir organ), and respond to tissue distension in a Piezo-dependent manner. Activating Piezo neurons decreases appetite, while Piezo knockout and Piezo neuron silencing cause gut bloating and increase both food consumption and body weight. These studies reveal that disrupting gut distension receptors changes feeding patterns, and identify a key role for Drosophila Piezo in internal organ mechanosensation.

Data availability

All datapoints used are provided in Figures and in a Source Data File.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Soohong Min

    Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Yangkyun Oh

    Molecular Neurobiology, Skirball Institute, NYU, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Pushpa Verma

    Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Samuel C Whitehead

    Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Nilay Yapici

    Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, Cornell University, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. David Van Vactor

    Department of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Greg SB Suh

    Molecular Neurobiology, Skirball Institute, NYU, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Stephen Liberles

    Department of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    Stephen_Liberles@hms.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    Stephen Liberles, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2177-9741

Funding

American Heart Association (20POST35210914)

  • Soohong Min

National Institutes of Health (NS090994)

  • David Van Vactor

National Institutes of Health (RO1DK116294)

  • Greg SB Suh

National Institutes of Health (RO1DK106636)

  • Greg SB Suh

Samsung Science and Technology Foundation (SSTF-BA-1802-11)

  • Greg SB Suh

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Stephen Liberles

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Claude Desplan, New York University, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: September 11, 2020
  2. Accepted: February 16, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: February 18, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: March 1, 2021 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Min 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

  • 3,101
    Page views
  • 450
    Downloads
  • 10
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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. Soohong Min
  2. Yangkyun Oh
  3. Pushpa Verma
  4. Samuel C Whitehead
  5. Nilay Yapici
  6. David Van Vactor
  7. Greg SB Suh
  8. Stephen Liberles
(2021)
Control of feeding by Piezo-mediated gut mechanosensation in Drosophila
eLife 10:e63049.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63049

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Stefanie Engert et al.
    Research Article

    Gustatory sensory neurons detect caloric and harmful compounds in potential food and convey this information to the brain to inform feeding decisions. To examine the signals that gustatory neurons transmit and receive, we reconstructed gustatory axons and their synaptic sites in the adult Drosophila melanogaster brain, utilizing a whole-brain electron microscopy volume. We reconstructed 87 gustatory projections from the proboscis labellum in the right hemisphere and 57 from the left, representing the majority of labellar gustatory axons. Gustatory neurons contain a nearly equal number of interspersed pre-and post-synaptic sites, with extensive synaptic connectivity among gustatory axons. Morphology- and connectivity-based clustering revealed six distinct groups, likely representing neurons recognizing different taste modalities. The vast majority of synaptic connections are between neurons of the same group. This study resolves the anatomy of labellar gustatory projections, reveals that gustatory projections are segregated based on taste modality, and uncovers synaptic connections that may alter the transmission of gustatory signals.

    1. Neuroscience
    Vladislav Ayzenberg, Stella Lourenco
    Research Article

    Categorization of everyday objects requires that humans form representations of shape that are tolerant to variations among exemplars. Yet, how such invariant shape representations develop remains poorly understood. By comparing human infants (6–12 months; N=82) to computational models of vision using comparable procedures, we shed light on the origins and mechanisms underlying object perception. Following habituation to a never-before-seen object, infants classified other novel objects across variations in their component parts. Comparisons to several computational models of vision, including models of high-level and low-level vision, revealed that infants’ performance was best described by a model of shape based on the skeletal structure. Interestingly, infants outperformed a range of artificial neural network models, selected for their massive object experience and biological plausibility, under the same conditions. Altogether, these findings suggest that robust representations of shape can be formed with little language or object experience by relying on the perceptually invariant skeletal structure.