A conserved neuropeptide system links head and body motor circuits to enable adaptive behavior

  1. Shankar Ramachandran
  2. Navonil Banerjee
  3. Raja Bhattacharya
  4. Michele L Lemons
  5. Jeremy Florman
  6. Christopher M Lambert
  7. Denis Touroutine
  8. Kellianne Alexander
  9. Liliane Schoofs
  10. Mark J Alkema
  11. Isabel Beets
  12. Michael M Francis  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Massachusetts Medical School, United States
  2. Assumption University, United States
  3. University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, United States
  4. University of Leuven (KU Leuven), Belgium

Abstract

Neuromodulators promote adaptive behaviors that are often complex and involve concerted activity changes across circuits that are often not physically connected. It is not well understood how neuromodulatory systems accomplish these tasks. Here we show that the C. elegans NLP-12 neuropeptide system shapes responses to food availability by modulating the activity of head and body wall motor neurons through alternate G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) targets, CKR-1 and CKR-2. We show ckr-2 deletion reduces body bend depth during movement under basal conditions. We demonstrate CKR-1 is a functional NLP-12 receptor and define its expression in the nervous system. In contrast to basal locomotion, biased CKR-1 GPCR stimulation of head motor neurons promotes turning during local searching. Deletion of ckr-1 reduces head neuron activity and diminishes turning while specific ckr-1 overexpression or head neuron activation promote turning. Thus, our studies suggest locomotor responses to changing food availability are regulated through conditional NLP-12 stimulation of head or body wall motor circuits.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files; source data files are provided as supplemental files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Shankar Ramachandran

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

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

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

    Biological and Physical Sciences, Assumption University, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8459-4130
  5. Jeremy Florman

    Neurobiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7578-3511
  6. Christopher M Lambert

    Neurobiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Denis Touroutine

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Kellianne Alexander

    University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Liliane Schoofs

    University of Leuven (KU Leuven), Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Mark J Alkema

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1311-5179
  11. Isabel Beets

    University of Leuven (KU Leuven), Leuven, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Michael M Francis

    University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, United States
    For correspondence
    michael.francis@umassmed.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8076-6668

Funding

NIH (R21NS093492)

  • Michael M Francis

European Research Council (340318)

  • Isabel Beets

Research Foundation Flanders Grant (G0C0618N)

  • Isabel Beets

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

Copyright

© 2021, Ramachandran 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

  • 2,155
    views
  • 295
    downloads
  • 14
    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. Shankar Ramachandran
  2. Navonil Banerjee
  3. Raja Bhattacharya
  4. Michele L Lemons
  5. Jeremy Florman
  6. Christopher M Lambert
  7. Denis Touroutine
  8. Kellianne Alexander
  9. Liliane Schoofs
  10. Mark J Alkema
  11. Isabel Beets
  12. Michael M Francis
(2021)
A conserved neuropeptide system links head and body motor circuits to enable adaptive behavior
eLife 10:e71747.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.71747

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.71747

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Gaqi Tu, Peiying Wen ... Kaori Takehara-Nishiuchi
    Research Article

    Outcomes can vary even when choices are repeated. Such ambiguity necessitates adjusting how much to learn from each outcome by tracking its variability. The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) has been reported to signal the expected outcome and its discrepancy from the actual outcome (prediction error), two variables essential for controlling the learning rate. However, the source of signals that shape these coding properties remains unknown. Here, we investigated the contribution of cholinergic projections from the basal forebrain because they carry precisely timed signals about outcomes. One-photon calcium imaging revealed that as mice learned different probabilities of threat occurrence on two paths, some mPFC cells responded to threats on one of the paths, while other cells gained responses to threat omission. These threat- and omission-evoked responses were scaled to the unexpectedness of outcomes, some exhibiting a reversal in response direction when encountering surprising threats as opposed to surprising omissions. This selectivity for signed prediction errors was enhanced by optogenetic stimulation of local cholinergic terminals during threats. The enhanced threat-evoked cholinergic signals also made mice erroneously abandon the correct choice after a single threat that violated expectations, thereby decoupling their path choice from the history of threat occurrence on each path. Thus, acetylcholine modulates the encoding of surprising outcomes in the mPFC to control how much they dictate future decisions.

    1. Neuroscience
    Philipp S O'Neill, Martín Baccino-Calace ... Igor Delvendahl
    Tools and Resources

    Quantitative information about synaptic transmission is key to our understanding of neural function. Spontaneously occurring synaptic events carry fundamental information about synaptic function and plasticity. However, their stochastic nature and low signal-to-noise ratio present major challenges for the reliable and consistent analysis. Here, we introduce miniML, a supervised deep learning-based method for accurate classification and automated detection of spontaneous synaptic events. Comparative analysis using simulated ground-truth data shows that miniML outperforms existing event analysis methods in terms of both precision and recall. miniML enables precise detection and quantification of synaptic events in electrophysiological recordings. We demonstrate that the deep learning approach generalizes easily to diverse synaptic preparations, different electrophysiological and optical recording techniques, and across animal species. miniML provides not only a comprehensive and robust framework for automated, reliable, and standardized analysis of synaptic events, but also opens new avenues for high-throughput investigations of neural function and dysfunction.