A transcriptomic taxonomy of Drosophila circadian neurons around the clock

  1. Dingbang Ma
  2. Dariusz Przybylski
  3. Katharine C Abruzzi
  4. Matthias Schlichting
  5. Qunlong Li
  6. Xi Long
  7. Michael Rosbash  Is a corresponding author
  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Brandeis University, United States
  2. Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States

Abstract

Many different functions are regulated by circadian rhythms, including those orchestrated by discrete clock neurons within animal brains. To comprehensively characterize and assign cell identity to the 75 pairs of Drosophila circadian neurons, we optimized a single cell RNA sequencing method and assayed clock neuron gene expression at different times of day. The data identify at least 17 clock neuron categories with striking spatial regulation of gene expression. Transcription factor regulation is prominent and likely contributes to the robust circadian oscillation of many transcripts, including those that encode cell-surface proteins previously shown to be important for cell recognition and synapse formation during development. The many other clock-regulated genes also constitute an important resource for future mechanistic and functional studies between clock neurons and/or for temporal signaling to circuits elsewhere in the fly brain.

Data availability

The single-cell RNA sequencing data has been deposited in GEO under the accession code GSE157504.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Dingbang Ma

    Department of Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, 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:" 0000-0002-5575-7604
  2. Dariusz Przybylski

    Department of Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Katharine C Abruzzi

    Department of Biology, National Center of Behavioral Genomics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, 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:" 0000-0003-3949-3095
  4. Matthias Schlichting

    Department of Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, 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:" 0000-0002-0822-0265
  5. Qunlong Li

    Department of Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Xi Long

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0268-8641
  7. Michael Rosbash

    Department of Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    For correspondence
    rosbash@brandeis.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3366-1780

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Dingbang Ma
  • Dariusz Przybylski
  • Katharine C Abruzzi
  • Matthias Schlichting
  • Qunlong Li
  • Xi Long
  • Michael Rosbash

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

Copyright

© 2021, Ma 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

  • 6,479
    views
  • 819
    downloads
  • 96
    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. Dingbang Ma
  2. Dariusz Przybylski
  3. Katharine C Abruzzi
  4. Matthias Schlichting
  5. Qunlong Li
  6. Xi Long
  7. Michael Rosbash
(2021)
A transcriptomic taxonomy of Drosophila circadian neurons around the clock
eLife 10:e63056.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63056

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63056

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Bethany M Bartlett, Yatendra Kumar ... Wendy A Bickmore
    Research Article Updated

    During oncogene-induced senescence there are striking changes in the organisation of heterochromatin in the nucleus. This is accompanied by activation of a pro-inflammatory gene expression programme – the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) – driven by transcription factors such as NF-κB. The relationship between heterochromatin re-organisation and the SASP has been unclear. Here, we show that TPR, a protein of the nuclear pore complex basket required for heterochromatin re-organisation during senescence, is also required for the very early activation of NF-κB signalling during the stress-response phase of oncogene-induced senescence. This is prior to activation of the SASP and occurs without affecting NF-κB nuclear import. We show that TPR is required for the activation of innate immune signalling at these early stages of senescence and we link this to the formation of heterochromatin-enriched cytoplasmic chromatin fragments thought to bleb off from the nuclear periphery. We show that HMGA1 is also required for cytoplasmic chromatin fragment formation. Together these data suggest that re-organisation of heterochromatin is involved in altered structural integrity of the nuclear periphery during senescence, and that this can lead to activation of cytoplasmic nucleic acid sensing, NF-κB signalling, and activation of the SASP.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Timothy Fuqua, Yiqiao Sun, Andreas Wagner
    Research Article

    Gene regulation is essential for life and controlled by regulatory DNA. Mutations can modify the activity of regulatory DNA, and also create new regulatory DNA, a process called regulatory emergence. Non-regulatory and regulatory DNA contain motifs to which transcription factors may bind. In prokaryotes, gene expression requires a stretch of DNA called a promoter, which contains two motifs called –10 and –35 boxes. However, these motifs may occur in both promoters and non-promoter DNA in multiple copies. They have been implicated in some studies to improve promoter activity, and in others to repress it. Here, we ask whether the presence of such motifs in different genetic sequences influences promoter evolution and emergence. To understand whether and how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution, we start from 50 ‘promoter islands’, DNA sequences enriched with –10 and –35 boxes. We mutagenize these starting ‘parent’ sequences, and measure gene expression driven by 240,000 of the resulting mutants. We find that the probability that mutations create an active promoter varies more than 200-fold, and is not correlated with the number of promoter motifs. For parent sequences without promoter activity, mutations created over 1500 new –10 and –35 boxes at unique positions in the library, but only ~0.3% of these resulted in de-novo promoter activity. Only ~13% of all –10 and –35 boxes contribute to de-novo promoter activity. For parent sequences with promoter activity, mutations created new –10 and –35 boxes in 11 specific positions that partially overlap with preexisting ones to modulate expression. We also find that –10 and –35 boxes do not repress promoter activity. Overall, our work demonstrates how promoter motifs influence promoter emergence and evolution. It has implications for predicting and understanding regulatory evolution, de novo genes, and phenotypic evolution.