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

  • 2,125
    views
  • 294
    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
    Christine Ahrends, Mark W Woolrich, Diego Vidaurre
    Tools and Resources

    Predicting an individual’s cognitive traits or clinical condition using brain signals is a central goal in modern neuroscience. This is commonly done using either structural aspects, such as structural connectivity or cortical thickness, or aggregated measures of brain activity that average over time. But these approaches are missing a central aspect of brain function: the unique ways in which an individual’s brain activity unfolds over time. One reason why these dynamic patterns are not usually considered is that they have to be described by complex, high-dimensional models; and it is unclear how best to use these models for prediction. We here propose an approach that describes dynamic functional connectivity and amplitude patterns using a Hidden Markov model (HMM) and combines it with the Fisher kernel, which can be used to predict individual traits. The Fisher kernel is constructed from the HMM in a mathematically principled manner, thereby preserving the structure of the underlying model. We show here, in fMRI data, that the HMM-Fisher kernel approach is accurate and reliable. We compare the Fisher kernel to other prediction methods, both time-varying and time-averaged functional connectivity-based models. Our approach leverages information about an individual’s time-varying amplitude and functional connectivity for prediction and has broad applications in cognitive neuroscience and personalised medicine.

    1. Neuroscience
    Jessica Royer, Valeria Kebets ... Boris C Bernhardt
    Research Article Updated

    Complex structural and functional changes occurring in typical and atypical development necessitate multidimensional approaches to better understand the risk of developing psychopathology. Here, we simultaneously examined structural and functional brain network patterns in relation to dimensions of psychopathology in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) dataset. Several components were identified, recapitulating the psychopathology hierarchy, with the general psychopathology (p) factor explaining most covariance with multimodal imaging features, while the internalizing, externalizing, and neurodevelopmental dimensions were each associated with distinct morphological and functional connectivity signatures. Connectivity signatures associated with the p factor and neurodevelopmental dimensions followed the sensory-to-transmodal axis of cortical organization, which is related to the emergence of complex cognition and risk for psychopathology. Results were consistent in two separate data subsamples and robust to variations in analytical parameters. Although model parameters yielded statistically significant brain–behavior associations in unseen data, generalizability of the model was rather limited for all three latent components (r change from within- to out-of-sample statistics: LC1within = 0.36, LC1out = 0.03; LC2within = 0.34, LC2out = 0.05; LC3within = 0.35, LC3out = 0.07). Our findings help in better understanding biological mechanisms underpinning dimensions of psychopathology, and could provide brain-based vulnerability markers.