Stereotyped behavioral maturation and rhythmic quiescence in C.elegans embryos

  1. Evan L Ardiel  Is a corresponding author
  2. Andrew Lauziere
  3. Stephen Xu
  4. Brandon J Harvey
  5. Ryan Patrick Christensen
  6. Stephen Nurrish
  7. Joshua M Kaplan
  8. Hari Shroff
  1. Massachusetts General Hospital, United States
  2. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, United States

Abstract

Systematic analysis of rich behavioral recordings is being used to uncover how circuits encode complex behaviors. Here we apply this approach to embryos. What are the first embryonic behaviors and how do they evolve as early neurodevelopment ensues? To address these questions, we present a systematic description of behavioral maturation for Caenorhabditis elegans embryos. Posture libraries were built using a genetically encoded motion capture suit imaged with light-sheet microscopy and annotated using custom tracking software. Analysis of cell trajectories, postures, and behavioral motifs revealed a stereotyped developmental progression. Early movement is dominated by flipping between dorsal and ventral coiling, which gradually slows into a period of reduced motility. Late-stage embryos exhibit sinusoidal waves of dorsoventral bends, prolonged bouts of directed motion, and a rhythmic pattern of pausing, which we designate slow wave twitch (SWT). Synaptic transmission is required for late-stage motion but not for early flipping nor the intervening inactive phase. A high-throughput behavioral assay and calcium imaging revealed that SWT is elicited by the rhythmic activity of a quiescence-promoting neuron (RIS). Similar periodic quiescent states are seen prenatally in diverse animals and may play an important role in promoting normal developmental outcomes.

Data availability

Annotated image volumes are available on FigShare. Code for MHHT is available on GitHub.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Evan L Ardiel

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    ardiel@molbio.mgh.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9366-5751
  2. Andrew Lauziere

    National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Stephen Xu

    National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Brandon J Harvey

    National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7471-9937
  5. Ryan Patrick Christensen

    National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Stephen Nurrish

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2653-9384
  7. Joshua M Kaplan

    Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7418-7179
  8. Hari Shroff

    National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

William Randolph Hearst Foundation

  • Evan L Ardiel

National Science Foundation (DGE-1632976)

  • Andrew Lauziere

National Institutes of Health (NS32196)

  • Joshua M Kaplan

National Institutes of Health (NS121182)

  • Joshua M Kaplan

National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering

  • Hari Shroff

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

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 1,625
    views
  • 297
    downloads
  • 6
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.76836

Further reading

    1. Medicine
    2. Neuroscience
    Ayni Sharif, Matthew S Jeffers ... Manoj M Lalu
    Research Article

    C-C chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5) antagonists may improve both acute stroke outcome and long-term recovery. Despite their evaluation in ongoing clinical trials, gaps remain in the evidence supporting their use. With a panel of patients with lived experiences of stroke, we performed a systematic review of animal models of stroke that administered a CCR5 antagonist and assessed infarct size or behavioural outcomes. MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase were searched. Article screening and data extraction were completed in duplicate. We pooled outcomes using random effects meta-analyses. We assessed risk of bias using the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) tool and alignment with the Stroke Treatment Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) and Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) recommendations. Five studies representing 10 experiments were included. CCR5 antagonists reduced infarct volume (standard mean difference −1.02; 95% confidence interval −1.58 to −0.46) when compared to stroke-only controls. Varied timing of CCR5 administration (pre- or post-stroke induction) produced similar benefit. CCR5 antagonists significantly improved 11 of 16 behavioural outcomes reported. High risk of bias was present in all studies and critical knowledge gaps in the preclinical evidence were identified using STAIR/SRRR. CCR5 antagonists demonstrate promise; however, rigorously designed preclinical studies that better align with STAIR/SRRR recommendations and downstream clinical trials are warranted. Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42023393438).

    1. Neuroscience
    Damian Koevoet, Laura Van Zantwijk ... Christoph Strauch
    Research Article

    What determines where to move the eyes? We recently showed that pupil size, a well-established marker of effort, also reflects the effort associated with making a saccade (‘saccade costs’). Here, we demonstrate saccade costs to critically drive saccade selection: when choosing between any two saccade directions, the least costly direction was consistently preferred. Strikingly, this principle even held during search in natural scenes in two additional experiments. When increasing cognitive demand experimentally through an auditory counting task, participants made fewer saccades and especially cut costly directions. This suggests that the eye-movement system and other cognitive operations consume similar resources that are flexibly allocated among each other as cognitive demand changes. Together, we argue that eye-movement behavior is tuned to adaptively minimize saccade-inherent effort.