Abstract
Sensory neurons drive animal behaviors by detecting environmental stimuli and relaying information to downstream circuits. Beyond their primary roles in sensing, these neurons often form additional synaptic connections outside their main sensory modality, suggesting broader contributions to behavior modulation. Here, we uncover an unexpected role for the thermosensory neuron AFD in coupling tactile experience to locomotion modulation in Caenorhabditis elegans. We show that while AFD employs cGMP signaling for both thermotaxis and tactile-dependent modulation, the specific molecular components of the cGMP pathway differ between these two processes. Interestingly, disrupting the dendritic sensory apparatus of AFD, which is essential for thermotaxis, does not impair tactile-based locomotion modulation, indicating that AFD can mediate tactile-dependent behavior independently of its thermosensory apparatus. In contrast, ablating the AFD neuron eliminates tactile-dependent modulation, pointing to an essential role for AFD itself, rather than its sensory dendritic endings. Further, we find tactile-dependent modulation requires the AIB interneuron, which connects AFD to touch circuits via electrical synapses. Removing innexins expressed in AFD and AIB abolishes this modulation, while re-establishing AFD-AIB connections with engineered electrical synapses restores it. Collectively, these findings uncover a previously unrecognized function of AFD beyond thermosensation, highlighting its influence on context-dependent neuroplasticity and behavioral modulation through broader circuit connectivity.
Introduction
Adaptive behavioral responses require animals to interpret sensory signals in the context of prior experiences, enabling effective responses to changing environmental conditions. For example, rodents associate contextual cues, such as odors and colors, with rewards or punishments, leading to context-dependent adjustments in approach or avoidance behaviors [1,2]. Disruptions in the biological processes underlying this plasticity, as seen in neurological and psychiatric disorders, often result in impaired behavior modulation based on prior sensory experiences [3–7]. Recognizing the critical role of context-dependent behavioral modulation for survival and well-being, ongoing research focuses on uncovering the neuroplastic mechanisms responsible for these adaptive processes.
Studies across diverse organisms reveal that animals, regardless of nervous system complexity, integrate prior sensory experiences to shape behavior [8–15]. In the nematode C. elegans, which has only 302 neurons, locomotion strategies are modified by prior exposure to stimuli such as odors, touch, light, and starvation, demonstrating robust adaptive behaviors [16–23]. The wide range of adaptive behaviors, combined with the well-mapped C. elegans nervous system and abundant genetic tools, have empowered the discovery of fundamental circuit mechanisms and molecular pathways underlying context-dependent behavioral modulation [24–28].
The C. elegans sensory system comprises 60 ciliated sensory neurons specialized in detecting chemical, thermal, mechanical, and olfactory stimuli [29,30]. Each sensory neuron has a dendritic apparatus that converts specific environmental signals into neuronal activity, which drives signal flow through downstream networks of interneurons and motor neurons, ultimately shaping behavior [31–33]. Among these, AFD, a pair of bilaterally symmetric left-right neurons, serves as the primary thermosensory neurons required for thermotaxis (movement toward the a preferred temperature) [34]. The dendritic endings of AFD, enriched with microvilli, serve as the primary site for thermal detection. Even when detached from the cell body, these dendritic endings retain calcium responsiveness to temperature stimuli [35]. Moreover, genetically disrupting these sensory endings abolishes the Ca²⁺ response in AFD cell bodies to temperature changes and eliminates thermotaxis, underscoring their essential role in thermal sensing [36–38].
The second messenger cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) plays a central role in modulating AFD thermosensory activity. Temperature changes in AFD neurons trigger intracellular Ca²⁺ dynamics, with Ca²⁺ levels rising during warming and falling during cooling [35,39,40]. This response relies on cGMP synthesis mediated by the guanylyl cyclases (GCs) gcy-8, gcy-18, and gcy-23, which have overlapping but distinct roles. Specifically, gcy-8 is essential for generating thermally evoked Ca²⁺ responses in AFD [41,42], whereas gcy-18 and gcy-23 act synergistically to sustain temperature sensing [41,43]. The cGMP produced by these cyclases activates cyclic nucleotide-gated (CNG) channels, comprised of alpha-subunits TAX-4 and beta-subunits TAX-2, resulting in increases in intracellular Ca²⁺. Mutations in either tax-4 or tax-2 abolish thermally evoked Ca²⁺ responses in AFD and disrupt thermotaxis, underscoring the importance of cGMP signaling for AFD-mediated thermosensation [40].
AFD transmits thermal signals to several downstream interneurons, including AIY, AIZ, and AIB, which process this information to guide temperature-dependent behaviors. Thermotaxis in C. elegans encompasses three categories: movement toward warmer temperatures (thermophilic), movement toward cooler temperatures (cryophilic), and movement within a preferred temperature range (isothermal) [44,45]. Each behavior type depends on distinct AFD synaptic partners: AIY is critical for thermophilic and isothermal behaviors [46,47]; AIZ is specific for cryophilic behavior [48–50]; and AIB also supports thermophilic behavior, though its role is less critical than that of AIY [51]. These findings demonstrate the functional specificity of synaptic partners of AFD neurons in shaping distinct temperature-dependent behaviors.
In this study, we demonstrate that AFD plays a novel role in tactile-mediated, context-dependent locomotion modulation, thereby expanding its function beyond temperature sensing. The mechanisms underlying this role differ markedly from those involved in thermosensation. First, context-dependent modulation requires distinct cGMP signaling components. Second, while the microvilli-rich sensory endings of AFD are essential for thermosensation, they are dispensable for context-dependent modulation. Third, this modulation depends on mechanosensory neurons and on electrical synapses between AFD and the AIB interneuron, which connects to mechanosensory circuits. Finally, disruption of inx-7 and inx-10 genes, encoding gap junction protein innexins in AFD and AIB, impairs context-dependent locomotion modulation. Remarkably, restoring AFD-AIB connectivity via engineered Cx36 electrical synapses rescues this function. Collectively, our findings uncover an unconventional mechanism by which AFD mediates behavior modulation based on tactile experience.
Results
C. elegans display distinct locomotion in identical environments after exploring different physical structures
To test whether prior physical experience influences C. elegans behavior, we allowed worms to explore microfluidic chambers with distinct pillar designs before recording their locomotion in identical assay zones (Fig. 1A). Because the environment within the assay zone is the same across chambers, behavioral differences observed there are likely to reflect an influence of prior tactile experience. To implement this assay, we designed two microfluidic chambers that differ only in the physical structure of the exploration zone: a uniform chamber and a binary chamber (Fig. 1A). Before reaching the assay zone, worms explore surrounding areas with pillar designs that differ in size and spacing (exploration zone, Fig. 1A). This design allowed us to assess how exposure to different physical contexts impacts locomotion in an otherwise identical setting.

C. elegans displays distinct locomotion in identical environments after exploring different surrounding areas.
(A) Schematic of two microfluidic chamber designs: uniform and binary. Both chambers contain an identical assay area (red dashed-line boxes) where locomotion was analyzed, while the surrounding exploration zones differ in PDMS pillar arrangement. (B-E) Quantification of locomotion in the assay area after 1 hour of exploration. Data from binary chambers (n = 21) are shown in orange and from uniform (n = 21) chambers in blue. Shown are (B) locomotion speed, (C) percentage of time spent idle, (D) reversal frequency, and (E) turning frequency. Statistical significance was determined using an unpaired Student’s t-test (***p < 0.001, *p < 0.05). Mean ± SEM; each point represents the mean behavioral value of all worms within one chamber. (F) Percent change in each locomotion metric (speed, idle time, reversal frequency, and turning frequency), calculated from panels B-E and normalized to the mean value in binary chambers. Mean ± SEM; each point represents the mean behavioral value of all worms within one chamber.
Worms were allowed to explore the chambers for 60 minutes before behavior was recorded in the assay zones. We found that worms in the uniform chamber assay zone exhibited locomotor behavior distinct from those in the binary chamber assay zone (Fig.1 B-F). Specifically, worms in the uniform chamber assay zone moved approximately 40% faster (Fig. 1B, F), spent ∼20% less time idle (Fig. 1C, F), reversed direction ∼20% less frequently (Fig. 1D, F), and turned ∼30% more often (Fig. 1E, F) than worms in the binary chamber assay zone. Among the parameters measured, locomotion speed showed the most robust and reproducible modulation, establishing a stable behavioral metric for dissecting the underlying circuit and molecular mechanisms. These findings demonstrate that locomotion is shaped by past sensory experience rather than solely by immediate environmental cues.
Because worms in the binary chamber are exposed to both pillar types and remain free to move between exploration and assay zones, the behavioral differences described above could reflect exposure to a more complex physical environment rather than prior experience alone. To directly test whether locomotion is modulated by prior physical experience independently of continued access to the exploration zone, we designed microfluidic chambers in which the assay zone could be separated from the exploration zone by a removable barrier (Fig. 1–Supplement 1A). In these chambers, worms were initially allowed to explore the entire device, including exploration zones that either matched or differed from the assay zone. A barrier was then inserted to prevent worms in the assay zone from re-entering the exploration zones.
Under these conditions, locomotion immediately after barrier insertion was higher in worms that had previously explored physical settings matching the assay zone (205 ± 8 µm/s) than in worms that had explored non-matching settings (151 ± 7 µm/s; p = 0.006; Fig. 1–Supplement 1B). This difference persisted when worms were recorded 40 minutes after barrier insertion, with animals in matching chamber retaining their higher locomotion rates (218 ± 11 µm/s) compared to those in non-matching chambers (185 ± 8 µm/s; p = 0.02; Fig. 1–Supplement 1B). These findings demonstrate that prior exploration of distinct physical environments can modulate locomotion even when worms are prevented from returning to those environments, supporting a role for prior physical experience independent of ongoing sensory input.
Guanylyl cyclase gene gcy-18 is required for context-dependent locomotion modulation in chambers
To identify mechanisms underlying context-dependent locomotion adjustments, we employed a previously reported preference assay that uses microfluidic arenas to assess the ability of worms to select a preferred space [52]. Because worms must adjust their locomotion based on their surroundings to remain within a preferred area, we hypothesized that mutations abolishing this preference would reveal key mechanisms underlying context-dependent adjustments in the uniform and binary chambers. Accordingly, we screened for mutant worms that failed to choose their preferred area, aiming to identify the genetic mechanisms mediating locomotion adjustments in response to different physical structures.
Given the significant role of cGMP in neuronal plasticity and behavior modulation, we performed a small-scale genetic screen using loss-of-function mutants for 24 genes encoding guanylyl cyclases (GCs), the enzymes responsible for cGMP synthesis. Using the preference assay, we identified two putative null mutants, gcy-18(gk423024) and gcy-12(gk142661), that displayed significant defects in spatial preference (Fig. 2–Supplement 1A). We then compared the locomotion of gcy-18 and gcy-12 mutants in both uniform and binary chambers. gcy-12 mutant worms exhibited normal speed adjustment compared to wild type (Δspeed: gcy-12: 24 ± 5% vs. N2: 35 ± 7%, p = 0.27, Fig. 2–Supplement 1B), indicating that gcy-12 is not required for locomotion modulation. In contrast, gcy-18(gk423024) mutants failed to execute context-dependent speed adjustment (Δspeed gcy-18: 3 ± 5% vs. N2: 35 ± 7%; p = 0.0013; Fig. 2A). A second allele, gcy-18(nj38), similarly showed significantly reduced Δspeed (11 ± 2%; p =0.011 compared to wild type; Fig. 2A). Together, these results indicate that gcy-18 is required for context-dependent behavioral adjustment.

Guanylate cyclase gene gcy-18 functions in AFD to mediate context-dependent locomotion modulation.
(A) Difference in locomotion speed (Δspeed) between uniform and binary chambers of wild type N2 (uniform: n = 19; binary: n = 20), gcy-18(gk423024) mutant (uniform: n = 20; binary: n = 28), and gcy-18(nj38) mutant (uniform: n = 27, binary: n = 27). ΔSpeed was calculated as the percent change in locomotion speed in uniform chambers, relative to the mean speed measured in binary chambers (see Methods). Mutant worms lacking gcy-18 failed to demonstrate context-dependent locomotion adjustments in locomotion speed, as indicated by a low Δspeed value. (B) Δspeed of wild type, gcy-18 mutants, and gcy-18 mutant worms carrying a single-copy transgene expressing gcy-18 under the control of the gcy-18 promoter. Expression of gcy-18p::gcy-18 restored Δspeed (uniform: n= 26; binary: n = 24). (C) Locomotion speed adjustment of N2, gcy-18 mutants, and gcy-8 mutant worms (uniform: n = 20, binary: n = 18). Disruption of gcy-8 does not impair context-dependent locomotion modulation. (D) Schematic illustrating the distinct roles of guanylate cyclase genes in AFD sensory neurons: gcy-8 is required for thermosensation but not for context-dependent locomotion modulation, whereas gcy-18 is essential for context-dependent locomotion modulation and plays only a modest role in thermosensation. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Each data point represents the mean behavior of worms within a single chamber. Asterisks above bars indicate statistical significance compared to wild type, whereas asterisks above horizontal black lines indicate statistical significance between mutant strains. Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA followed by a Tukey-Kramer post hoc test (n.s.: p > 0.05; *: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01).
To confirm that the defects observed in gcy-18 mutants were not due to background artifacts, we introduced a single-copy gcy-18 transgene driven by the gcy-18 promoter into gcy-18(gk423024) mutants. Expression of this transgene restored locomotion adjustments to near wild type levels (Δspeed: gcy-18p::gcy-18: 28 ± 6% vs. N2: 35 ± 7%, p = 0.8, Fig. 2B), confirming that loss of gcy-18 underlies the observed behavioral defects. The identification of gcy-18 was particularly intriguing, as its expression is restricted to a single pair of neurons, the thermosensory AFDs. Given that our assay chambers lacked thermal gradients, these findings suggest a previously unrecognized role for gcy-18 and AFD neurons in mediating locomotion adjustments based on prior exploration of physical environments.
To further investigate the role of AFD-specific guanylyl cyclases in context-dependent locomotion modulation, we examined gcy-8, which is essential for generating thermally evoked Ca²⁺ responses in AFD [41,42]. In thermal responses, disrupting gcy-8 alone is sufficient to impair AFD function, whereas disruption of gcy-18 alone does not [41,43], indicating the critical role of GCY-8 in AFD thermosensation. If gcy-18 influenced behavioral adjustment in microfluidic chambers solely through its role in thermosensation, we would expect that a loss-of-function mutation in gcy-8 would have a similar or even more disruptive impact on locomotion modulation. However, gcy-8 mutant worms exhibit little change in their ability to adjust locomotion speed, with Δspeed values similar to that observed in wild type worms (Δspeed: gcy-8: 29 ± 7% vs. N2: 35 ± 7%; p = 0.96; Fig. 2C). These results indicate that while gcy-8 is critical for thermosensation, its mutation does not affect context-dependent locomotion modulation, suggesting that independent cGMP signaling mechanisms govern AFD neuronal activity in thermosensation and context-dependent behavior in microfluidic chambers (Fig. 2D).
Distinct CNG channels mediate context-dependent locomotion modulation and thermosensation
The role of guanylyl cyclase in cGMP synthesis prompted us to investigate whether cyclic nucleotide-gated (CNG) channels are involved in context-dependent locomotion modulation. CNG channels, composed of α and β subunits, open upon binding cyclic nucleotides (e.g., cGMP and cAMP), allowing Ca²⁺ influx [53–56] to control signal transduction and neural plasticity across species [57–64] (Fig. 3A). In C. elegans, mutations in either the tax-4 or tax-2 genes, which encode the α and β subunits of CNG channels respectively, impair thermotaxis behavior [47,65] and eliminates AFD responses to temperature changes [40,66]. To determine their role in context-dependent locomotion modulation, we examined tax-4(p678) and tax-2(p694) mutant worms using our microfluidic chamber assay.

Cyclic nucleotide-gated (CNG) channel subunits TAX-2 and CNG-3 are required for locomotion modulation, but TAX-4 is not.
(A) Schematic representation of CNG channel function. CNG channels are activated by cyclic nucleotides (such as cGMP) and mediate Ca²⁺ influx, thereby influencing neuronal activity and animal behavior. (B) Locomotion speed (µm/s) of N2 (uniform: n = 30; binary: n = 29), tax-2 (uniform: n = 27; binary: n = 22), and tax-4 (uniform: n = 21; binary: n = 21) mutant worms in binary (orange) and uniform (blue) chambers. The tax-2 mutants exhibit identical locomotion rates in both chamber types, whereas worms lacking tax-4 display accelerated basal locomotion while still preserving context-dependent locomotion modulation. Asterisks above blue bars indicate statistically significant differences in locomotion speed between uniform and binary chambers (unpaired Student’s t-test). Asterisks above horizontal black lines indicate statistically significant differences in basal speed, defined as speed of worms in the binary chamber, between N2 and tax-4 mutants (one-way ANOVA followed by a Tukey-Kramer post hoc test; n.s.: p > 0.05; ***: p < 0.001). (C) Speed differences (Δspeed) for N2, tax-2 mutant, and tax-4 mutant worms. The tax-2 mutants failed to modulate locomotion rates in a context-dependent manner, whereas tax-4 mutations enhanced modulation. (D) Assessment of cng-2 (uniform: n = 24; binary: n = 22), cng-3 (uniform: n = 29; binary: n = 28), and cng-4 (uniform: n = 24; binary: n = 29) roles in locomotion adjustments. The cng-3 mutation abolishes locomotion modulation. (E) Single-copy transgenes expressing cng-3 cDNA under two AFD-specific promoters, srtx-1bp (uniform: n = 26; binary: n = 22) and gcy-18p (uniform: n = 26; binary: n = 25), restore context-dependent locomotion adjustments. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Each data point represents the mean behavior of worms within a single chamber. Asterisks denote statistical significance versus wild type (above bars) or between mutant strains (above horizontal black lines). Δspeed comparisons across strains (panels C-E) were determined using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey-Kramer post hoc tests (*: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01, and ***: p < 0.001).
We found that tax-2 is essential for context-dependent locomotion modulation, as tax-2 mutants did not exhibit differences in speed between chamber types (Fig. 3B, C). In contrast, tax-4 mutants displayed an enhanced locomotion adjustment compared to wild type worms (Δspeed: tax-4: 68 ± 6% vs. N2: 41± 6%; p = 0.002; Fig. 3C), a striking difference from the lack of speed changes seen in tax-2 mutants (Δspeed: tax-2: 2 ± 2%; p < 0.0001 compared to wild type). We examined the locomotion speed of mutant worms in the binary chambers, which we refer to as the basal speed because wild type worms consistently move slowest in this environment. We found tax-4 mutants showed significantly higher basal speed than the wild type (tax-4: 193 ± 9 µm/s vs. N2: 104 ± 4 µm/s, p < 0.0001; Fig. 3B), indicating that tax-4 mutants can still adjust locomotion speed based on prior experience even when basal locomotion is accelerated.
To further examine how basal locomotion influences context-dependent modulation, we took advantage of the fact that worm locomotion rates are sensitive to environmental temperature [67,68]. We examined the relationship between temperature-induced changes in basal locomotion and locomotion modulation based on prior experience of physical surroundings. Wild type worms cultivated at either 23°C or 17°C and then transferred to 20°C exhibited significantly changes in basal locomotion speed. Despite changes in basal speed, the extent of locomotion modulation in the chambers was largely unaffected (Fig.3–Supplement 1A). Specifically, locomotion speed was positively correlated with temperature shifts in both chambers (binary chambers: r = 0.52, p < 0.0001; uniform chambers: r = 0.48, p < 0.0001; Fig.3–Supplement 1B), whereas no significant correlation was observed between temperature and Δspeed (r = −0.03, p = 0.22; Fig.3—Supplement 1C), supporting the notion that basal locomotion speed and context-dependent modulation are regulated independently.
Together, these observations indicate that TAX-2 is required for integrating prior experience into locomotion modulation, whereas TAX-4 primarily regulates overall locomotion level. Although both pathways engaging cGMP signaling, their distinct phenotypes suggest separate regulatory mechanisms for basal locomotion and context-dependent adjustments.
Given that four other genes (cng-1, cng-2, cng-3 and cng-4) are predicted to encode CNG channels in C. elegans, we investigated their role in locomotion modulation in microfluidic chambers [69]. Due to abnormal development in cng-1 mutants, we were unable to assess their locomotion; however, we were able to evaluate mutants of the other three genes. We found that cng-3(gk541751) mutant worms showed significantly decreased speed modulation compared to wild type (Δspeed: cng-3: 5 ± 4%, p = 0.0002; Fig. 3D), while cng-2(tm4267) and cng-4(gk195496) mutants exhibited normal modulation comparable to wild type worms (p = 0.54 and p = 4.47 respectively; Fig. 3D). The identification of CNG-3 was particularly intriguing, as recent studies suggest that it mediates changes in AFD neuronal activity based on prior temperature experiences [70,71], indicating that CNG-3 contributes to neural plasticity rather than direct stimulus detection. Our results further support this view by showing that CNG-3 plays a broader role in locomotion modulation in environments lacking thermal gradients, which suggests its involvement in neuronal plasticity beyond the thermosensory modality.
Next, we determined whether AFD is the site where CNG-3 functions in context-dependent locomotion modulation. To do so, we introduced single-copy transgenes expressing cng-3 cDNA under the control of two AFD-specific promoters, srtx-1Bp and gcy-18p, into cng-3(gk541751) mutant worms. Regardless of the promoter used, AFD-specific expression of cng-3 restored the locomotion speed modulation to levels comparable to wild type (Δspeed: srx-1Bp::cng-3: 47 ± 8%; p < 0.0001 compared to cng-3 mutant, p = 0.91 compared to wild type; and gcy-18p::cng-3: 40 ± 6%, p = 0.0007 compared to cng-3 mutant, p = 0.99 compared to wild type; Fig. 3E). These results indicate that AFD neurons are the site of action for CNG-3 in mediating context-dependent locomotion modulation. Together, our findings reveal a role for AFD beyond thermosensation and show that components of a cGMP signaling pathway enable AFD to modulate locomotion in an experience-dependent manner.
AFD sensory microvilli are dispensable for locomotion modulation, but AFD neurons are required
The finding that GCY-18 and CNG-3 in AFD neurons are required for context-dependent locomotion prompted us to test whether the AFD thermosensory apparatus is also necessary for this function. This apparatus consists of sensory microvilli at the tip of the AFD dendrite (Fig. 4A) and is essential for temperature sensing and thermotaxis [36,38]. For example, mutations in the kcc-3 gene, which encodes a K+/Cl⁻ cotransporter in the amphid sheath glia, disrupt microvilli formation and significantly impair thermotaxis toward the cultivation temperature [37].

AFD, but not its sensory endings, is required for context-dependent locomotion modulation.
(A) Schematic representation of AFD function in temperature sensing and locomotion modulation. AFD sensory endings are essential for thermosensation but dispensable for context-dependent locomotion modulation. (B) Locomotion speed (μm/s) of wild type N2 (uniform: n = 22; binary: n = 22) and kcc-3 (uniform: n = 27; binary: n = 27) mutant worms in the binary (orange) and uniform (blue) chambers. The kcc-3 mutants preserve context-dependent locomotion modulation while exhibiting increased basal locomotion rates. Asterisks above blue bars indicate significant differences between uniform and binary chambers (unpaired Student’s t-test). Basal speed differences in the binary chambers were determined using one-way ANOVA followed by a Tukey–Kramer post hoc tests (***: p < 0.001). (C) Δspeed of N2 and kcc-3 mutant worms, and (D) Δspeed of N2 (uniform: n = 22; binary: n = 22) and ttx-1 (uniform: n = 27; binary: n = 27)mutant worms. Context-dependent locomotion modulation remains in kcc-3 and ttx-1 mutant worms, although they abolish the AFD thermosensory function. (E) Ablation of AFD eliminates the context-dependent modulation of speed, idle time, and turning frequency (uniform: n = 34; binary: n = 36). Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Each data point represents the mean behavior of worms within a single chamber. Asterisks indicate statistical significance compared to wild type. Δspeed across strains (panels C-E) was analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey-Kramer post hoc tests (n.s.: p > 0.05, and ***: p < 0.001).
Despite this disruption, locomotion modulation based on experience of physical settings remained intact in kcc-3(ok228) mutant worms compared to wild type (Δspeed: kcc-3: 33 ± 4% vs. N2: 42 ± 7%, p = 0.28; Fig. 4B, C). kcc-3 mutants also displayed elevated basal locomotion rates (basal speed: kcc-3: 174 ± 8 µm/s vs. N2: 115 ± 7 µm/s, p < 0.0001; Fig. 4B), similar to what we observed in tax-4 mutants. This supports our earlier finding that overall locomotion rate does not necessarily correlate with context-dependent modulation.
To further test whether AFD sensory endings are required for context-dependent locomotion modulation, we examined ttx-1(767) mutant worms, which completely lack AFD microvilli and exhibit more severe thermotaxis defects than kcc-3 mutants [38]. Despite the loss of sensory microvilli, ttx-1 mutants retained the ability to modulate locomotion in microfluidic chambers. The extent of modulation was modestly reduced and more variable compared to wild type animals (Δspeed: ttx-1: 29 ± 10% vs. N2: 42 ± 7%, p = 0.29, Fig. 4D). Because ttx-1 mutations disrupt the expression of multiple AFD genes, including components of the cGMP signaling pathway [72], this increased variability may reflect broader perturbations in AFD function. Nonetheless, these results indicate that AFD sensory microvilli are not strictly required for context-dependent locomotion modulation.
Given that gcy-18 is required for context-dependent locomotion modulation and that GCY-18 localizes to the distal dendrite of AFD, we next examined how disruption of sensory microvilli affects its localization in AFD. We used a split-GFP strategy to visualize endogenous GCY-18 [73]. A tandem array of seven GFP11 β-strands (GFP11x7) was inserted at the C-terminus of GCY-18 using CRISPR-Cas9. When complemented with GFP1-10, GCY-18::GFP11x7 fluorescence was strongly enriched at the AFD sensory microvilli near the nose (Fig. 4–Supplement 1A-A′′), consistent with previous reports [42,74,75]. In addition, weaker but reproducible GCY-18 signal was detected near the AFD soma and axon (Fig. 4–Supplement 1A′′′). Importantly, in kcc-3, which exhibit disrupted sensory microvilli, and ttx-1 mutants, which lack sensory microvilli, GCY-18 remained localized to the distal dendrite and was still detectable near the soma and axon (Fig. 4–Supplement 1B-B′′’ and 1C-C′′′). Although these experiments do not identify the precise subcellular site at which GCY-18 acts, they show that disruption or loss of sensory microvilli does not substantially alter GCY-18 localization within AFD.
We next asked whether AFD neurons themselves are required for this behavior. Using a published strain expressing caspase under the AFD-specific gcy-8 promoter [76], we found that AFD-ablated worms completely lost the ability to adjust locomotion in microfluidic chambers. These animals showed no detectable differences between uniform and binary chambers in locomotion speed, idle time, or turning frequency (Fig. 4E). Together, these results indicate that while AFD sensory microvilli are dispensable for context-dependent locomotion modulation, the AFD neurons themselves are essential.
Building on our finding that locomotion modulation can be driven by prior physical experience even after worms are prevented from re-entering the exploration zones, we next tested whether AFD is required for this modulation using chambers in which the exploration and assay zones were separated by a removable barrier (Fig. 1–Supplement 1A). Under these conditions, locomotion modulation was significantly reduced in AFD-ablated worms (Δspeed: -AFD = 1 ± 6% vs. N2 = 23 ± 7%; p = 0.036; Fig. 4–Supplement 2A). Similarly, gcy-18 mutants showed defective locomotion modulation (Δspeed: gcy-18 = -1 ± 8% vs. N2 = 23 ± 7%; p = 0.034; Fig. 4–Supplement 2A). These results indicate that AFD and gcy-18 are required to generate locomotion modulation in response to recent physical experience.
Finally, to determine whether the modulation defects observed in gcy-18 mutants and AFD-ablated worms could be attributed to developmental abnormalities or gross motor impairments, we measured locomotion speed and body length on standard NGM plates. Both day-1 adult AFD-ablated worms (speed: 281 ± 10 µm/s; p = 0.33; body length: 1.12 ± 0.01 mm; p = 0.76) and gcy-18 mutants (speed: 291 ± 13 µm/s; p = 0.22; body length: 1.15 ± 0.02 mm; p = 0.86) showed locomotion speeds and body lengths comparable to wild type controls (speed: 252 ± 30 µm/s; body length: 1.14 ± 0.02 mm; Fig. 4–Supplement 2B, C). These results indicate that the loss of context-dependent locomotion modulation is not due to developmental defects or gross impairments in locomotion.
Context-dependent locomotion modulation requires the MEC-10 mechanosensory channel subunit
Having established that AFD integrates prior physical experience independent of its thermosensory apparatus, we next asked whether direct mechanosensory input is required for context-dependent locomotion modulation. The mec-10 gene encodes an amiloride-sensitive Na+ channel protein required for sensing body touch. Mutations in mec-10 disrupt mechanotransduction channels in the worms, impairing touch sensitivity [77,78]. We found that mec-10(tm1552) mutants failed to display locomotion adjustment compared to wild type worms (Δspeed: mec-10: 5 ± 4% vs. N2: 33 ± 6%, p = 0.0003; Fig. 5A). These results show that mec-10 is crucial for context-dependent locomotion modulation, supporting the hypothesis that locomotion is modulated depending on the worm’s tactile experience.

Context-dependent locomotion adjustments require the mechanosensory channel subunit MEC-10 and the interneuron AIB.
(A) Δspeed of wild type (uniform: n = 26; binary n = 22), mec-10 mutants (uniform: n = 30; binary n = 21), and mec-10 mutants expressing mec-10 cDNA under cell-specific promoters: mec-18p (TRNs; uniform: n = 29; binary n = 25), egl-44p (FLP; uniform: n = 27; binary n = 34), or mec-10p (TRNs, FLP, and PVD; uniform: n = 32; binary n = 26). (B) Δspeed of wild type and AIB-ablated worms (uniform: n = 30; binary n = 30). AIB ablation abolishes speed modulation. Data are shown as mean ± SEM; each data point represents the average speed of worms in a single chamber. Asterisks indicate statistical significance compared to wild type (one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey-Kramer post hoc tests; ***p < 0.001). (C) Schematic illustrating a circuit framework connecting mec-10 expressing neurons, AIB, and AFD in tactile-dependent modulation of locomotion.
The mec-10 gene is expressed in several mechanosensory neurons, including the six touch receptor neurons (TRNs) and the polymodal nociceptors FLP and PVD [77,79]. To determine which neurons are required for tactile-dependent locomotion modulation, we expressed mec-10 cDNA under cell-specific promoters: mec-18p (TRNs) [80], egl-44p (FLP) [81], or mec-10p (TRNs, FLP, and PVD) [79]. Expression in either FLP or TRNs alone did not restore modulation, as worms carrying egl-44p::mec-10 (Δspeed: −11 ± 4%) or mec-18p::mec-10 (Δspeed: −13 ± 4%) transgenes showed significantly reduced Δspeed compared to wild type (Δspeed: N2: 33 ± 6%; p < 0.0001 for both; Fig. 5A). By contrast, mec-10 co-expression in both FLP and TRNs (Δspeed: 16 ± 4%), or expression from the mec-10 promoter (Δspeed: 23 ± 4%), restored Δspeed to wild type levels (p = 0.20 and p = 0.57, respectively; Fig. 5A). These findings indicate that mec-10 expression across multiple mechanosensory neuron types is required for context-dependent locomotion modulation. It is also worth noting that, while both tactile-dependent locomotion modulation and previously reported spatial preference require FLP, only the former depends on TRNs. Together, these findings suggest that distinct subsets of mechanosensory neurons differentially contribute to behaviors shaped by tactile experience.
AIB interneurons are crucial for tactile-dependent behavioral plasticity
Touch-sensitive neurons that express mec-10, including TRNs, FLP, and PVD, do not form direct synapses with AFD, suggesting that tactile information is relayed through intermediary neurons. Because the interneuron AIB receives synaptic input from FLP and forms electrical synapses with AFD, we hypothesized that AIB could serve as a conduit for mechanosensory signals to reach AFD. To test whether AIB is required for tactile-dependent modulation, we examined locomotion in worms with genetically ablated AIB neurons using npr-9p::caspase expression [82]. AIB-ablated worms failed to adjust locomotion speed, showing a near-complete loss of modulation (Δspeed: −1 ± 5%) compared to wild type (30 ± 8%, p = 0.001, Fig. 5B). These results demonstrate that AIB is required for AFD-mediated tactile-dependent locomotion modulation. However, because mec-10-expressing TRNs are also required, additional pathways beyond AIB likely contribute to transmitting tactile information to AFD, potentially involving indirect synaptic connections through other interneurons or long-distance signaling via neuropeptides or other modulators (Fig. 5C).
Mutations in innexin genes disrupt tactile-dependent modulation
Electrical synapses between AIB and AFD neurons in C. elegans are formed by gap junction proteins known as innexins [83]. If electrical coupling between AIB and AFD contributes to tactile-dependent locomotion modulation, then disruption of innexin genes should impair locomotion adjustments in microfluidic chambers. To test this, we examined loss-of-function mutants of several innexin genes. C. elegans possesses 25 innexin genes [84,85]. Single-cell RNA-seq data from the CeNGEN database [86] indicate that three genes (inx-4, inx-10, and inx-19) are expressed in AFD, one (inx-1) is expressed in AIB, and one (inx-7) is expressed in both. We found that inx-4, inx-7, and inx-10 mutants exhibited a partial but significant reduction in locomotion modulation compared to wild type worms (Δspeed: N2: 45 ± 7%; inx-4: 23 ± 5%, p = 0.037; inx-7: 21 ± 5%, p = 0.013; inx-10: 16 ± 3%, p = 0.0007; Fig. 6A). Mutations in inx-1 also reduced Δspeed values, although the effect did not reach statistical significance (Δspeed: inx-1: 25 ± 6%, p = 0.076), whereas inx-19 mutations had little impact on speed modulation (inx-19: 32 ± 5%, p = 0.51, vs. wild type; Fig. 6A). Furthermore, inx-7; inx-10 double mutants exhibited a more pronounced reduction in Δspeed compared to single mutants (Δspeed: inx-7; inx-10 double mutant: 6 ± 5%; p = 0.032 compared to inx-7 single mutant; Fig. 6B). Together, these findings suggest that multiple innexin genes act redundantly to support tactile-dependent locomotion modulation.

Tactile-dependent locomotion modulation is disrupted in mutant worms lacking gap junction genes and is restored by engineered Cx36 electrical synapses linking AFD and AIB.
(A) Speed differences (Δspeed) for wild type worms (uniform: n = 23; binary: n = 25) and inx-1 (uniform: n = 24,; binary: n = 24), inx-4 (uniform: n = 27; binary: n = 26), inx-7 (uniform: n = 29; binary: n= 30), inx-10 (uniform: n = 30; binary: n = 29), inx-19 (uniform: n = 23; binary: n = 24) mutants. (B) Speed differences for inx-7; inx-10 double mutants (uniform: n = 25; binary: n = 27). (C) Schematic illustrating engineered electrical synapses formed by Cx36 when expressed in adjacent neurons. (D) AFD-specific expression of inx-10 cDNA restored tactile-dependent locomotion modulation in inx-10 mutant worms (srtx-1bp; uniform: n = 23; binary: n = 24). Expression of Cx36 in both AFD (srtx-1bp) and AIB (inx-1p) similarly restored modulation in inx-7; inx-10 double mutants (uniform: n = 30; binary: n = 28). Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Asterisks denote statistical significance versus wild type (above bars) or between indicated genotypes (above horizontal black lines). Each data point represents the mean behavior of worms within a single chamber. Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey-Kramer post hoc tests (*: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01, and ***: p < 0.001).
Targeted electrical coupling between AFD and AIB restores tactile-dependent modulation
We next tested whether restoring inx-10 specifically in AFD would be sufficient to rescue the behavioral defect. Using the AFD-specific srtx-1b promoter, we expressed inx-10 cDNA in inx-10 mutant worms. These transgenic animals displayed significantly improved locomotion modulation (Δspeed: 42 ± 5%) compared to non-transgenic inx-10 mutants (15 ± 4%; p = 0.018; Fig. 6D), indicating that inx-10 expression in AFD alone is sufficient to restore function.
To directly test whether restoring the electrical connection between AFD and AIB could rescue modulation in innexin mutants, we expressed the mammalian gap junction protein Cx36 [87–90] in both AFD (srtx-1Bp) and AIB (inx-1p) neurons in inx-7; inx-10 double mutants (Fig. 6C). Cx36 expression significantly improved locomotion modulation, restoring Δspeed from 7 ± 4% to 35 ± 8% (p = 0.0035; Fig. 6D). These results demonstrate that although innexin mutations disrupt connectivity across multiple neurons, restoring a single targeted electrical connection between AFD and AIB is sufficient to rescue tactile-dependent locomotion modulation, identifying the AIB-AFD electrical synapse as a critical circuit element for tactile-dependent behavioral control.
Discussion
Our study reveals that the thermosensory AFD neuron plays an unexpected role in coupling tactile experiences to locomotion modulation in C. elegans. We show that: 1) C. elegans exhibit distinct locomotion patterns in identical environments, influenced by prior tactile experiences; 2) tactile-dependent behavior modulation requires the AFD neuron but not its thermosensory dendritic endings; 3) thermotaxis and tactile-dependent locomotion modulation rely on distinct sets of cGMP signaling proteins and CNG channel subunits; 4) the AIB interneuron, which connects AFD to mechanosensory circuits, is essential for tactile modulation; and 5) electrical synapses between AFD and AIB are critical for this process. Below, we discuss the implications of these findings.
A thermosensation-independent role for AFD in tactile-dependent behavior modulation
Our findings highlight the remarkable versatility of sensory neurons in shaping behaviors beyond their primary functions. This supports the emerging view that sensory neurons have multifaceted roles in circuit modulation, extending well beyond canonical sensory activities. Such complexity is encoded at multiple levels within neural circuits. In C. elegans, for instance, the ASH neuron drives avoidance responses to various noxious stimuli, including hyperosmolarity, nose touch, and volatile repellents, demonstrating polymodal functionality [91–94]. Similarly, the olfactory receptor neuron AWC exhibits stochastic responses to temperature, introducing variability that enhances the flexibility and reliability of thermotactic behavior [95–97]. In contrast to these examples, the role of AFD in tactile-dependent plasticity does not rely on its sensory endings but is mediated through synaptic connectivity. This reveals an unexpected mechanism by which AFD influences context-dependent behavioral plasticity via network-level interactions rather than direct sensory activity.
Distinct cGMP signaling pathways in AFD mediate sensation and plasticity
Our data indicates that the CNG channel α subunits TAX-4 and CNG-3 play distinct roles in AFD function. Although TAX-4 is essential for AFD to detect temperature and generate thermally evoked responses [40], it is dispensable for tactile-dependent locomotion modulation. By contrast, CNG-3, which is not required for temperature sensing [70], is crucial for tactile-dependent locomotion modulation. Consistent with a broader role in sensory plasticity, CNG-3 is required in AWC neurons for short-term odor adaptation [98] and in AFD for adjusting temperature thresholds based on prior thermal experiences [70]. Our demonstration that CNG-3 is essential for tactile-dependent locomotion modulation further supports the view that CNG-3 enables context-dependent behavioral plasticity rather than directly mediating stimulus detection.
CNG channels are heteromeric complexes composed of both α and β subunits. Our data, along with previous work, show that TAX-2, the CNG β subunit in C. elegans, is required for both tactile-dependent locomotion modulation and thermotransduction [40]. Interestingly, TAX-4, the canonical α partner of TAX-2, is not required for tactile-dependent modulation. This suggests that TAX-2 may support experience-dependent neural plasticity either on its own or by pairing with alternative α subunits such as CNG-3. This type of functional specialization is reminiscent of photoreceptor neurons, where the composition and ratio of CNG channel subunits determine light sensitivity and enable contrast detection under varying light intensities [99–101]. It is worth noting that the tax-2(p694) mutation affects tax-2 expression in four neurons (AFD, BAG, ASE, and ADE) [102]. Moreover, the strong convergence of functional and circuit-level evidence, including the requirement for GCY-18, the rescue of CNG-3 function in AFD, and role of AIB–AFD coupling, points to AFD as the most likely site of TAX-2 function in tactile-dependent locomotion modulation.
In addition to the diversity of CNG channels, guanylyl cyclases in AFD also exhibit functional specificity. For example, mutations in gcy-18 alone significantly disrupt tactile-dependent locomotion modulation without substantially affecting temperature sensing [41,43], whereas gcy-8 is essential for generating thermally evoked Ca²⁺ responses [41,42] yet appears dispensable for tactile-dependent plasticity. These results show that AFD uses distinct sets of guanylyl cyclases to execute dual roles: precise temperature sensing and tactile-dependent behavioral modulation.
Differential regulation of context-dependent plasticity and basal locomotion rates in AFD
Our results further suggest that the mechanisms controlling basal locomotion and context-dependent behavioral modulation are not only distinct but also operate independently. Temperature fluctuations significantly affect basal locomotion rates, i.e., higher temperatures accelerate speed, while lower temperatures slow it down [67,68]. However, tactile-dependent locomotion modulation in microfluidic chambers remains robust despite these temperature-induced changes in basal movement. This independence is further supported by our observations in tax-4 and kcc-3 mutants, which display elevated basal locomotion rates yet still adjust their locomotion in response to tactile experiences. These findings indicate that the processes governing basal locomotion and context-dependent modulation are controlled by separate, non-interfering mechanisms, even though both pathways engage cGMP signaling.
Electrical synapses link the thermosensory neuron AFD to tactile-dependent behavioral modulation
AIB-AFD electrical synapses are pivotal for tactile-dependent behavioral plasticity. Disrupting this connection impairs tactile-dependent locomotion modulation, whereas restoring an engineered electrical synapse rescues this behavior. The successful replacement of invertebrate innexins with vertebrate connexins, which perform analogous functions despite lacking sequence homology, indicates that the core function of these synapses lies in their connectivity rather than in their specific protein sequences. This observation suggests that the transfer of signaling molecules such as Ca²⁺ and cGMP through electrical synapses may facilitate the coordination of neuronal activity across distinct networks [103–106].
Together, these findings support a model in which AIB functions as a hub neuron that relays mechanosensory input from FLP to AFD to modulate locomotion (Fig. 5C). However, because electrical synapses are often bidirectional, information flow may also occur in the opposite direction, from AFD to AIB. Determining the directionality and dynamics of this signaling remains an important question for future investigation. A similar circuit logic has been proposed for thermal avoidance behavior, in which AIB integrates inputs from FLP via chemical synapses and couples to AFD via electrical synapses, forming an FLP-AIB-AFD circuit. In that case, the directionality of information flow also remains unresolved [107].
Finally, the proposed circuit mechanism for tactile-dependent modulation does not exclude additional routes of modulation. These may include extra-synaptic signaling mechanisms, such as neuropeptide release from other touch-sensitive neurons. While the precise molecular and circuit mechanisms remain to be elucidated, our findings establish that AIB-AFD electrical synapses are essential for incorporating tactile context into locomotor control.
In summary, our findings reveal an unexpected role for AFD in tactile-dependent behavioral plasticity. They show that specialized molecular mechanisms, including distinct cGMP signaling pathways, diverse guanylyl cyclases, and functional electrical synapse connectivity, enable AFD sensory neurons to perform dual functions: detect stimuli and support tactile-dependent plasticity. A limitation of this study is that the directionality and mode of information flow between AFD and AIB remain unresolved, and defining this relationship will be an important goal for future investigation. Nevertheless, our results establish the AFD-AIB connection as a regulatory hub in tactile-dependent locomotor modulation and expand our understanding of sensory neuron versatility in adaptive behavior.
Methods
Nematode Strains and Growth
C. elegans strains were maintained under standard conditions at 20°C on nematode growth medium (NGM) agar plates [108]. These plates were seeded with E. coli OP50 lawns. Strains used in this study are listed in Table S1 and are available from the corresponding author upon request.
Molecular Biology
All DNA constructs were sequence-verified. cDNA sequences encoding mec-10, cng-3, and inx-10 were amplified from a cDNA library made with the SuperScript III Reverse Transcriptase kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA) from total RNA extracted from adult N2 worms. A codon-optimized cDNA sequence for the mouse gap junction protein connexin-36 (Cx36) was previously described [109]. DNA plasmid constructs for C. elegans expression were assembled by LR recombination using the MultiSite Gateway Three-Fragment Vector Construction Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, MA). Entry clones were constructed as follows: (i) promoter sequences flanked by attL4 and attR1 sites; (ii) cDNA sequences flanked by attL1 and attL2 sites; and (iii) sl2::mNeonGreen::rab-3 3′utr flanked by attR2 and attL3 sites. Destination vectors used for LR recombination included the pDEST R4-R3 Vector II and a custom-built destination vector BJP-C957, which contains a hygromycin resistance cassette for selection, an intestinal fluorescent marker (vha-6p::mScarlet::tbb-2 3’utr) for visual screening transgenic worms, and flanking mos1 sequences to facilitate homologous recombination for Mos1-mediated single-copy insertion (MosSCI). Promoters used for tissue- or cell-specific expression were: gcy-18p (2 kb) and srtx-1Bp (493 bp) for AFD; mec-18p (390 bp) for TRNs; egl-44p (5 kb) for FLP; inx-1p (1kb) for AIB, and mec-10p (3 kb) for expression in TRNs, FLP, and PVD. Plasmids used to generate transgenic strains in this study are listed in Table S2.
Transgenes, Germline Transformation, and Genome Editing
Strains carrying extrachromosomal arrays were generated by microinjecting various plasmids together with co-injection markers. The co-injection markers included unc-112p::gfp (30 ng/µl), rpl-28p::neoR (20 ng/µl), and Cbr-unc-119 (20 ng/µl). The blank vector pBluescript was used as filler DNA to bring the final total DNA concentration to 100 ng/µl. A detailed list of the plasmids used to create transgenic worms in this study is provided in Table S2.
Mos1-mediated transgene insertion [110,111] was used to generate single-copy transgenic animals. Briefly, worms carrying the ttTi5605 Mos1 site on chromosome II were injected with a plasmid mixture containing the transgene of interest (40 ng/µl), along with BJP-B908, a plasmid expressing Cas9 and a guide RNA targeting the Mos1 site (60 ng/µl). Selection markers included rps-0p::hygR for hygromycin resistance and vha-9p::mScarlet for intestinal red fluorescence to enable visual screening.
The gcy-18::gfp11×7 knock-in strain was generated using a modified CRISPR–Cas9 protocol employing preassembled Cas9 ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complexes, co-injected with a single-stranded DNA repair template to facilitate homologous recombination [112,113]. Cas9 protein and crRNA (targeting sequence: TACAACGACTGAAAGAGGAG) were obtained from Integrated DNA Technologies (IDT, NJ). The single-stranded DNA repair template for generating gcy-18::gfp11×7 was synthesized by Twist Bioscience. Successful editing produced the pek331 allele, which carries an in-frame GFP11×7 insertion at the C-terminus of GCY-18. The insertion was verified by PCR and DNA sequencing. A worm strain, BJH833, carrying both pek331 and muIs253 [eft-3p::sfgfp1-10::unc-54 3’utr], was used to visualize GCY-18 by complemented split-GFP fluorescence [114].
Fabrication of PDMS Microfluidic Chambers
Microfluidic chamber designs were created in AutoCAD and fabricated as 100 µm SU8-silicon molds using photolithography (FlowJem, NO, Canada). PDMS devices were produced by pouring degassed PDMS prepolymer (Sylgard 184, Dow Corning, MI) onto the molds, degassing again under vacuum (−25 inHg, 15 min, room temperature), and curing at 80 °C for 2 hours. The cured PDMS was peeled from the mold, and inlet/outlet ports were punched using a 2 mm biopsy punch (Acuderm Inc., FL). For the chambers with a removable barrier shown in Figure 1–Supplement 1A, cast PDMS chamber structures were bonded onto a thin semi-cured PDMS sheet to create a permanent, watertight seal. To prepare the sheet, ∼30 ml of PDMS was poured into a 6-inch Petri dish, degassed for 15 min, and partially cured at 65 °C for 15-20 min, until firm but still tacky. PDMS chamber structures were gently placed onto the sheet with ∼2 mm spacing to allow the formation of a barrier, then fully cured at 80 °C for 30 min. PDMS devices were bonded to 1 mm glass microscope slides using oxygen plasma treatment (PDC-32G, Harrick Scientific, NY, 1 min).
Behavior Recording and Analysis
Videos were captured for 10 seconds at 7.5 frames per second using a Basler acA2440 camera (Basler, PA) equipped with an AF Micro-NIKKOR 60 mm lens (Nikon, NY). Behavioral data were extracted from the videos using WormLab software (MBF Bioscience, VT) through individual worm tracking. Only those worms that were already within the assay area at the start of the recording were analyzed, and any worms that entered later were excluded. Crawling speed was determined by the total distance traveled by a worm during the 10 second recordings. A turn was defined as a change in crawling direction of 15° or more. Reversals were defined as sudden movement in the opposite direction for at least 5 frames (∼0.6 seconds). Worms were considered idle if their absolute velocity (distance traveled between frames) was below 20 µm/s for more than 10 frames (∼1.3 seconds).
For behavior analysis, worms were age-synchronized by transferring 30-50 young adult worms onto an NGM plate seeded with OP50 and allowing them to lay eggs for 2 hours before removal. The plates were then kept at room temperature (22°C) for 3 days, allowing the eggs to develop into young adults, identified by the presence of 5-10 eggs arranged in single rows within the gonads of all worms on the plate. To wash the synchronized adults off the plate, worms were gently transferred into Eppendorf tubes using glass Pasteur pipettes. After allowing the worms to settle at the bottom of the tube (∼1 minute), the supernatant was removed and replaced with fresh M9 buffer. This washing step was repeated three times to remove residual OP50. Next, approximately 30-70 worms were loaded into an inlet of the chambers shown in Figure 1 using a 20µl pipette and allowed to roam freely in the chamber for 60 minutes before behavior in the assay area was recorded.
To assay worms confined to the assay area by a barrier (Fig. 1–Supplement 1A), PDMS chambers were prepared with a removable gap separating the training and assay zones. M9 buffer was first injected into the exploration zone, after which ∼100 worms were loaded and allowed to explore for 10 minutes, during which they moved only within the reach of the M9 buffer, typically up to the gap between the exploration and assay zones. To remove the barrier, additional M9 buffer was gently introduced into the assay zone until it merged with the buffer, allowing worms to move freely between zones. After 15 minutes of exploration, the barrier was reintroduced by completely drying the space between the zones with a Kimwipe, once again confining worms to areas containing M9 buffer. Behavior in the assay zone was recorded immediately after the barrier was reinserted and again 40 minutes later.
Fluorescence microscopy
Widefield fluorescence microscopy was performed using a Leica DMi8 inverted microscope equipped with 63x/1.4NA and 100x/1.4NA oil-immersion objectives (Leica Biosystems, NJ). Worms were mounted on thin 3% agar pads and anesthetized with 10 mM levamisole diluted in M9 buffer. Images were acquired with an Andor iXon-888 EMCCD camera (Oxford Instruments, England), with an exposure time of 150 ms and an electron-multiplying (EM) gain of 200. Acquisition settings were kept constant across experiments.
Statistical Analysis
Behavior measurements were calculated for each individual chamber, and these chamber-specific values were then used to generate the final mean values shown in the bar plots. The sample size was defined as the number (approximately 25) of chambers analyzed per experiment. An unpaired Student’s t-test with Bonferroni correction was used to compare average speeds between uniform and binary chambers. To quantify the relative difference between groups, we calculated the percent change for each value in the uniform chambers relative to the mean of value from the binary chambers. Specifically, we subtracted the mean of the values from the binary chamber from each individual value in the uniform chamber. The result was then divided by the mean of the binary chamber and multiplied by 100 to express the difference as a percentage. For comparisons among multiple strains, we conducted one-way ANOVA followed by a Tukey–Kramer post hoc test on all possible pairwise comparisons. All statistical analyses were performed using R.
Figure supplements

Prior exploration of distinct physical settings modulates locomotion speed of worms in identical environments.
(A) Schematic of the chamber design with separate exploration and assay zones divided by a removable barrier. The assay zone was identical across conditions, whereas the exploration zone contained physical settings that were either matching or non-matching relative to the assay zone. Worms explored these settings before entering the assay zone, where they were confined by insertion of a barrier. (B) Quantification of locomotion speed for wild type N2 worms in the assay area was performed either immediately after inserting the barrier or 40 minutes later (matching: n = 25; non-matching: n = 28). Asterisks indicate statistically significant difference between matching and non-matching chambers (unpaired Student’s t-test; *: p <0.05; **: p < 0.01). (C) The percent change in locomotion speed (Δspeed) between worms that had explored matching and non-matching chambers was calculated and normalized to the mean value of the non-matching condition. Data are presented as mean ± SEM, with each point representing the mean value of worms within a single chamber.

Guanylyl cyclase genes gcy-18 and gcy-12 are required for spatial preference, but only gcy-18 supports context-dependent locomotion modulation.
(A) A small-scale screen of guanylyl cyclase genes required for spatial preference in microfluidic chambers. Preference index values were calculated as previously described [52]. Wild type worms exhibited a strong preference for area IV, the preferred region of the chamber [52], whereas gcy-18(gk423024) and gcy-12(gk142661) mutants showed significantly reduced preference. Data are shown as mean ± SEM; each point represents the mean value from one chamber. Statistical comparisons were performed using Dunnett’s test for multiple comparisons (** p < 0.01). (B) Speed differences (Δspeed) between uniform and binary chambers in wild type N2 and gcy-12 mutant worms. gcy-12 mutants displayed context-dependent locomotion modulation comparable to wild type. Data are shown as mean ± SEM; each point represents the mean behavior of worms within a single chamber. Statistical significance was determined using an unpaired Student’s t-test (n.s., p > 0.05).

Temperature shifts alter absolute locomotion speed but do not affect context-dependent locomotion modulation.
(A) Experimental design. Worms were cultivated at 17°C, 20°C, or 23°C and then transferred to 20°C for 1 hour before behavioral recording. (B) Locomotion speed of wild type N2 worms in the binary (left) and uniform (right) chambers after experiencing temperature shifts (+3°C: uniform n = 32; binary n = 31; 0°C: uniform n = 30; binary n = 29; -3°C: uniform n = 36; binary n = 35). Linear regression identified a significant positive correlation between rearing temperature and locomotion speed in both chambers. (C) Differences in speed (Δspeed) across temperature-shift conditions. Linear regression analysis revealed no significant relationship between Δspeed and temperature shift. Data are shown as mean ± SEM.

GCY-18 primarily localizes to AFD dendritic endings and remains detectable in kcc-3 and ttx-1 mutants.
GCY-18 was visualized using a split-GFP strategy (GCY-18::GFP11x7 complemented by GFP1-10). (A-C) Representative images of the head region of wild type (A), kcc-3 mutant (B), and ttx-1 mutant (C) worms. Left panels show brightfield images overlaid with GFP fluorescence. Middle panels (A′-C′) show GFP fluorescence alone. Right panels show higher-magnification views of the distal dendritic ending (nose region; A’’-C’’) and regions near the AFD soma and axon (A’’’-C’’’). Dashed boxes in the middle panels indicate the approximate regions shown at higher magnification in the right panels.

(A) AFD-ablated and gcy-18 mutant worms that experienced different exploration zones show impaired locomotion speed adjustment when confined to the assay zone by a removable barrier. Δspeed values for wild type N2 (matching: n = 25; non-matching: n = 28), gcy-18 mutants (matching: n = 22; non-matching: n = 17), and AFD-ablated worms (matching: n = 26; non-matching: n = 26). Data are presented as mean ± SEM, with each point representing the mean locomotion speed value of worms within a single chamber. (B) Locomotion rates of wild type (n = 15), gcy-18 mutants (n = 10), and AFD-ablated worms (n = 18) are comparable on NGM plates. (C) Body lengths of wild type, gcy-18 mutant, and AFD-ablated worms are not significantly different. Data are shown as Mean ± SEM, with each point representing an individual animal (Dunnett’s test, *p < 0.05; n.s., p > 0.05).


Strains used in this study

Plasmids used to generate transgenic strains in this study
Data availability
The data supporting the findings of this study are available in Dryad at https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.k3j9kd5pz.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by NIH grants R01NS109476 and R01NS115974 to JB. MR was supported by T32GM136534 and F31NS129545. The authors thank the Caenorhabditis elegans Genetics Center (funded by the NIH Office of Research Infrastructure Programs P40 OD010440) for providing worm strains. We also thank Lin Zhang and Yan Liu for their support in constructing DNA plasmids and generating transgenic worm strains. Special thanks to Melissa Woo (Mercer Island High School), Tabitha Ngo, and Sahithi Challam (Interlake High School) for their assistance with worm maintenance. We appreciate the members of the Bai lab for their critical reading of the manuscript. Additionally, we acknowledge the multiple mentorship programs at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, including the SURP Undergraduate Researchers and Pathways Undergraduate Researchers programs, supported in part by the Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA015704, for fostering relationships with high school and undergraduate trainees who contributed to this project.
Additional information
Funding
HHS | NIH | National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) (R01NS109476)
Jihong Bai
HHS | NIH | National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) (R01NS115974)
Jihong Bai
HHS | NIH | National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) (T32GM136534)
Manuel Rosero
HHS | NIH | National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) (F31NS129545)
Manuel Rosero
HHS | NIH | National Cancer Institute (NCI) (P30CA015704)
Jihong Bai
References
- 1.Some key parameters in contextual fear conditioning and extinction in adult ratsBehavioural Brain Research 462:114874https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2024.114874Google Scholar
- 2.The contextual brain: implications for fear conditioning, extinction and psychopathologyNat Rev Neurosci 14:417–428https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3492Google Scholar
- 3.Garofalo S, di Pellegrino G. Context-dependent extinction of threat memories: influences of healthy agingScientific Reports 8https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-31000-9Google Scholar
- 4.Ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and the effects of task demand context on facial affect appraisal in schizophreniaSoc Cogn Affect Neurosci 6:66–73https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsq018Google Scholar
- 5.Body expressions of emotion do not trigger fear contagion in autism spectrum disorderSocial Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 4:70–78https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsn038Google Scholar
- 6.Understanding social dysfunction in the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia: the role of emotion and sarcasm processingBrain 132:592–603https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awn314Google Scholar
- 7.Neural mechanisms of encoding social and non-social context information in autism spectrum disorderNeuropsychologia 50:3440–3449https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.09.029Google Scholar
- 8.Decoding of Context-Dependent Olfactory Behavior in DrosophilaNeuron 91:155–167https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.05.022Google Scholar
- 9.Visually Guided Behavior and Optogenetically Induced Learning in Head-Fixed Flies Exploring a Virtual LandscapeCurrent Biology 29:1647–1659https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.04.033Google Scholar
- 10.Multiple Maps of the Same Spatial Context Can Stably Coexist in the Mouse HippocampusCurrent Biology 30:1467–1476https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.02.018Google Scholar
- 11.High and low temperatures have unequal reinforcing properties in Drosophila spatial learningJ Comp Physiol A 192:727–735https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-006-0109-6Google Scholar
- 12.8-Nitro-cGMP attenuates context-dependent fear memory in miceBiochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 511:141–147https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2019.01.138Google Scholar
- 13.Social Context-Dependent Singing-Regulated DopamineJ Neurosci 26:9010–9014https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1335-06.2006Google Scholar
- 14.Drosophila melanogaster females change mating behaviour and offspring production based on social contextProceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 279:2417–2425https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.2676Google Scholar
- 15.Context dependency of in-flight responses by Manduca sexta moths to ambient differences in relative humidityJournal of Experimental Biology 221https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.177774Google Scholar
- 16.C. elegans Locomotory Rate Is Modulated by the Environment through a Dopaminergic Pathway and by Experience through a Serotonergic PathwayNeuron 26:619–631https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)81199-XGoogle Scholar
- 17.Caenorhabditis elegans learning in a structured maze is a multisensory behavioriScience 24https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.102284Google Scholar
- 18.Context-dependent regulation of feeding behaviour by the insulin receptor, DAF-2, in Caenorhabditis elegansInvert Neurosci. 16:: 4https://doi.org/10.1007/s10158-016-0187-2Google Scholar
- 19.Contextual Taste Cues Modulate Olfactory Learning in C. elegans by an Occasion-Setting MechanismCurrent Biology 14:1303–1308https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2004.06.066Google Scholar
- 20.Dopamine Mediates Context-Dependent Modulation of Sensory Plasticity in C. elegansNeuron 55:662–676https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2007.07.023Google Scholar
- 21.Food-Dependent Plasticity in Caenorhabditis elegans Stress-Induced Sleep Is Mediated by TOR-FOXA and TGF-β SignalingGenetics 209:1183–1195https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.118.301204Google Scholar
- 22.Natural sensory context drives diverse brain-wide activity during C. elegans matingCell https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.08.024Google Scholar
- 23.Neural Architecture of Hunger-Dependent Multisensory Decision Making in C. elegansNeuron 92:1049–1062https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.10.030Google Scholar
- 24.C. elegans locomotion: small circuits, complex functionsCurrent Opinion in Neurobiology 33:117–126https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2015.03.009Google Scholar
- 25.Neural Circuits of Sexual Behavior in Caenorhabditis elegansAnnual Review of Neuroscience 41:349–369https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-070815-014056Google Scholar
- 26.Behavioral avoidance of pathogenic bacteria by Caenorhabditis elegansTrends in Immunology 35:465–470https://doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2014.08.008Google Scholar
- 27.Multimodal sensory processing in Caenorhabditis elegansOpen Biol 8https://doi.org/10.1098/rsob.180049Google Scholar
- 28.Caenorhabditis elegans glia modulate neuronal activity and behaviorFront Cell Neurosci 8https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2014.00067Google Scholar
- 29.Electron microscopical reconstruction of the anterior sensory anatomy of the nematode caenorhabditis elegansJournal of Comparative Neurology 160:313–337https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.901600305Google Scholar
- 30.The nerve ring of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans: Sensory input and motor outputJournal of Comparative Neurology 162:71–110https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.901620106Google Scholar
- 31.Multisensory integration in C. elegansCurrent Opinion in Neurobiology 43:110–118https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2017.01.005Google Scholar
- 32.Behavioral plasticity in C. elegans: Paradigms, circuits, genesJournal of Neurobiology 54:203–223https://doi.org/10.1002/neu.10168Google Scholar
- 33.Context-dependent modulation reconfigures interactive sensory-mediated microcircuits in Caenorhabditis elegansCurrent Opinion in Neurobiology 29:17–24https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2014.04.006Google Scholar
- 34.The extraordinary AFD thermosensor of C. elegansPflugers Arch - Eur J Physiol 470:839–849https://doi.org/10.1007/s00424-017-2089-5Google Scholar
- 35.The AFD Sensory Neurons Encode Multiple Functions Underlying Thermotactic Behavior in Caenorhabditis elegansJ Neurosci 26:7444–7451https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1137-06.2006Google Scholar
- 36.A glial K+/Cl− cotransporter modifies temperature-evoked dynamics in Caenorhabditis elegans sensory neurons. GenesBrain and Behavior 15:429–440https://doi.org/10.1111/gbb.12260Google Scholar
- 37.A Glial K/Cl Transporter Controls Neuronal Receptive Ending Shape by Chloride Inhibition of an rGCCell 165:936–948https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.03.026Google Scholar
- 38.Specification of Thermosensory Neuron Fate in C. elegans Requires ttx-1, a Homolog of otd/OtxNeuron 31:943–956https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00431-7Google Scholar
- 39.cGMP dynamics that underlies thermosensation in temperature-sensing neuron regulates thermotaxis behavior in C. elegansPLOS One 17:e0278343https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278343Google Scholar
- 40.Bidirectional temperature-sensing by a single thermosensory neuron in C. elegansNat Neurosci 11:908–915https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2157Google Scholar
- 41.GCY-8, PDE-2, and NCS-1 are critical elements of the cGMP-dependent thermotransduction cascade in the AFD neurons responsible for C. elegans thermotaxis. J Gen Physiol 142:: 437–449https://doi.org/10.1085/jgp.201310959Google Scholar
- 42.Receptor-type Guanylyl Cyclases Confer Thermosensory Responses in C. elegansNeuron 90:235–244https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.03.002Google Scholar
- 43.Identification of Guanylyl Cyclases That Function in Thermosensory Neurons of Caenorhabditis elegansGenetics 172:2239–2252https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.105.050013Google Scholar
- 44.Normal and mutant thermotaxis in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegansProc Natl Acad Sci USA 72:4061–4065https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.72.10.4061Google Scholar
- 45.Thermotaxis in Caenorhabditis elegans Analyzed by Measuring Responses to Defined Thermal StimuliJ Neurosci 22:5727–5733https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-13-05727.2002Google Scholar
- 46.Neural coding in a single sensory neuron controlling opposite seeking behaviours in Caenorhabditis elegansNat Commun 2https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1352Google Scholar
- 47.Neural regulation of thermotaxis in Caenorhabditis elegansNature 376:344–348https://doi.org/10.1038/376344a0Google Scholar
- 48.Molecular Physiology of the Neural Circuit for Calcineurin-Dependent Associative Learning in Caenorhabditis elegansJ Neurosci 26:9355–9364https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0517-06.2006Google Scholar
- 49.Control of Neural Development and Function in a Thermoregulatory Network by the LIM Homeobox Gene lin-11J Neurosci 18:2084–2096https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.18-06-02084.1998Google Scholar
- 50.The role of the AFD neuron in C. elegans thermotaxis analyzed using femtosecond laser ablationBMC Neurosci 7https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-7-30Google Scholar
- 51.Context-dependent operation of neural circuits underlies a navigation behavior in Caenorhabditis elegansPNAS 117:6178–6188https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1918528117Google Scholar
- 52.Dopamine signaling tunes spatial pattern selectivity in C. eleganseLife 6https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.22896Google Scholar
- 53.Functional reconstitution of a heteromeric cyclic nucleotide-gated channel of Caenorhabditis elegans in cultured cellsBrain Research 821:160–168https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-8993(99)01111-7Google Scholar
- 54.Functional Co-assembly among Subunits of Cyclic-Nucleotide-Activated, Nonselective Cation Channels, and Across Species from Nematode to HumanBiophysical Journal 74:1333–1345https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(98)77846-4Google Scholar
- 55.Cyclic Nucleotide-Gated Ion ChannelsPhysiological Reviews 82:769–824https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00008.2002Google Scholar
- 56.Structural mechanisms of assembly, permeation, gating, and pharmacology of native human rod CNG channelNeuron 110:86–95https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2021.10.006Google Scholar
- 57.Dissecting the Signaling Mechanisms Underlying Recognition and Preference of Food OdorsJ Neurosci 34:9389–9403https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0012-14.2014Google Scholar
- 58.The cyclic nucleotide gated channel subunit CNG-1 instructs behavioral outputs in Caenorhabditis elegans by coincidence detection of nutritional status and olfactory inputNeuroscience Letters 632:71–78https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2016.08.037Google Scholar
- 59.Coupling Neuropeptide Levels to Structural Plasticity in Drosophila Clock NeuronsCurrent Biology 30:3154–3166https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.06.009Google Scholar
- 60.CNGA3 acts as a cold sensor in hypothalamic neurons. Lishko PV, Aldrich RW, Tominaga M, Sobolevsky A, editorseLife 9:e55370https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55370Google Scholar
- 61.Cyclic nucleotide-dependent ionic currents in olfactory receptor neurons of the hawkmoth Manduca sexta suggest pull–push sensitivity modulationEuropean Journal of Neuroscience 54:4804–4826https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.15346Google Scholar
- 62.Importance of the CNGA4 channel gene for odor discrimination and adaptation in behaving miceProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100:4299–4304https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0736071100Google Scholar
- 63.Altered synaptic plasticity and behavioral abnormalities in CNGA3-deficient mice. GenesBrain and Behavior 10:137–148https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-183X.2010.00646.xGoogle Scholar
- 64.Synaptic Plasticity in CNGA3−/− Mice: Cone Bipolar Cells React on the Missing Cone Input and Form Ectopic Synapses with RodsJ Neurosci 26:5248–5255https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4483-05.2006Google Scholar
- 65.Mutations in a Cyclic Nucleotide–Gated Channel Lead to Abnormal Thermosensation and Chemosensation in C. elegansNeuron 17:707–718https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80202-0Google Scholar
- 66.The C. elegans Thermosensory Neuron AFD Responds to WarmingCurrent Biology 14:1291–1295https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2004.06.060Google Scholar
- 67.Effect of Temperature Pre-Exposure on the Locomotion and Chemotaxis of C. elegansPLOS One 9:e111342https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111342Google Scholar
- 68.The effect of temperature on the speed of locomotion in Caenorhabditis elegansThe Expedition 5Google Scholar
- 69.Cell- and subunit-specific mechanisms of CNG channel ciliary trafficking and localization in C. elegansJ Cell Sci 126:4381–4395https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.127274Google Scholar
- 70.Feedforward and feedback mechanisms cooperatively regulate rapid experience-dependent response adaptation in a single thermosensory neuron typebioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.12.05.570166Google Scholar
- 71.A new putative cyclic nucleotide-gated channel gene, cng-3, is critical for thermotolerance in Caenorhabditis elegansBiochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 325:525–531https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.10.060Google Scholar
- 72.Co-expression of the transcription factors CEH-14 and TTX-1 regulates AFD neuron-specific genes gcy-8 and gcy-18 in C. elegansDevelopmental Biology 399:325–336https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2015.01.010Google Scholar
- 73.NATF (Native and Tissue-Specific Fluorescence): A Strategy for Bright, Tissue-Specific GFP Labeling of Native Proteins in Caenorhabditis elegansGenetics 212:387–395https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.119.302063Google Scholar
- 74.Molecular encoding of stimulus features in a single sensory neuron type enables neuronal and behavioral plasticityCurrent Biology 0https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2023.02.073Google Scholar
- 75.Ciliopathy proteins establish a bipartite signaling compartment in a C. elegans thermosensory neuronJournal of Cell Science 127:5317–5330https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.157610Google Scholar
- 76.Heat Avoidance Is Regulated by Transient Receptor Potential (TRP) Channels and a Neuropeptide Signaling Pathway in Caenorhabditis elegansGenetics 188:91–103https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.111.127100Google Scholar
- 77.The DEG/ENaC Protein MEC-10 Regulates the Transduction Channel Complex in Caenorhabditis elegans Touch Receptor NeuronsJ Neurosci 31:12695–12704Google Scholar
- 78.Spatial Asymmetry in the Mechanosensory Phenotypes of the C. elegans DEG/ENaC Gene mec-10Journal of Neurophysiology 104:3334–3344https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00330.2010Google Scholar
- 79.Gene interactions affecting mechanosensory transduction in Caenorhabditis elegansNature 367:467–470https://doi.org/10.1038/367467a0Google Scholar
- 80.Combinatorial Marking of Cells and Organelles with Reconstituted Fluorescent ProteinsCell 119:137–144https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2004.09.012Google Scholar
- 81.Inhibition of touch cell fate by egl-44 and egl-46 in C. elegansGenes Dev 15:789–802https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.857401Google Scholar
- 82.Concentration memory-dependent synaptic plasticity of a taste circuit regulates salt concentration chemotaxis in Caenorhabditis elegansNat Commun 4:2210https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3210Google Scholar
- 83.Innexins: Expression, Regulation, and FunctionsFrontiers in Physiology 9:1414https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2018.01414Google Scholar
- 84.High resolution map of Caenorhabditis elegans gap junction proteinsDevelopmental Dynamics 238:1936–1950https://doi.org/10.1002/dvdy.22025Google Scholar
- 85.Innexins get into the gapBioEssays 23:388–396https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.1057Google Scholar
- 86.Molecular topography of an entire nervous systemCell 184:4329–4347https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.06.023Google Scholar
- 87.Circumventing neural damage in a C. elegans chemosensory circuit using genetically engineered synapsesCell Systems 12:263–271https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2020.12.003Google Scholar
- 88.NMDAR-mediated modulation of gap junction circuit regulates olfactory learning in C. elegansNat Commun 11:3467https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17218-0Google Scholar
- 89.Rewiring neural circuits by the insertion of ectopic electrical synapses in transgenic C. elegansNat Commun 5:4442https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5442Google Scholar
- 90.Engineering new synaptic connections in the C. elegans connectomeWorm 4:e992668https://doi.org/10.4161/21624054.2014.992668Google Scholar
- 91.A Distributed Chemosensory Circuit for Oxygen Preference in C. elegansPLOS Biology 4:e274https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040274Google Scholar
- 92.Synaptic code for sensory modalities revealed by C. elegans GLR-1 glutamate receptorNature 378:82–85https://doi.org/10.1038/378082a0Google Scholar
- 93.A dual mechanosensory and chemosensory neuron in Caenorhabditis elegansProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 90:2227–2231https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.90.6.2227Google Scholar
- 94.Odour concentration-dependent olfactory preference change in C. elegansNat Commun 3https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1750Google Scholar
- 95.An olfactory neuron responds stochastically to temperature and modulates Caenorhabditis elegans thermotactic behaviorProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105:11002–11007https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0805004105Google Scholar
- 96.Temperature Sensing by an Olfactory Neuron in a Circuit Controlling Behavior of C. elegansScience 320:803–807https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1148922Google Scholar
- 97.AWC thermosensory neuron interferes with information processing in a compact circuit regulating temperature-evoked posture dynamics in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegansNeuroscience Research 188:10–27https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2022.11.001Google Scholar
- 98.Contribution of the cyclic nucleotide gated channel subunit, CNG-3, to olfactory plasticity in Caenorhabditis elegansSci Rep 7https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-00126-7Google Scholar
- 99.Subunit Configuration of Heteromeric Cone Cyclic Nucleotide-Gated ChannelsNeuron 42:401–410https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(04)00225-9Google Scholar
- 100.Molecular mechanism for 3:1 subunit stoichiometry of rod cyclic nucleotide-gated ion channelsNat Commun 2https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1466Google Scholar
- 101.The heteromeric cyclic nucleotide-gated channel adopts a 3A:1B stoichiometryNature 420:193–198https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01201Google Scholar
- 102.A Putative Cyclic Nucleotide–Gated Channel Is Required for Sensory Development and Function in C. elegansNeuron 17:695–706https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80201-9Google Scholar
- 103.Biotin-cGMP and -cAMP are able to permeate through the gap junctions of some amacrine cells in the mouse retina despite their large sizeFront Ophthalmol 3https://doi.org/10.3389/fopht.2023.1334602Google Scholar
- 104.Localized Calcium Signaling and the Control of Coupling at Cx36 Gap JunctionseNeuro 7https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0445-19.2020Google Scholar
- 105.On the Diverse Functions of Electrical SynapsesFront Cell Neurosci 16https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2022.910015Google Scholar
- 106.Gap junctions: historical discoveries and new findings in the Caenorhabditis elegans nervous systemBiology Open 9:bio053983https://doi.org/10.1242/bio.053983Google Scholar
- 107.Temperature- and Touch-Sensitive Neurons Couple CNG and TRPV Channel Activities to Control Heat Avoidance in Caenorhabditis elegansPLOS One 7:e32360https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032360Google Scholar
- 108.The genetics of Caenorhabditis elegansGenetics 77:71–94https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/77.1.71Google Scholar
- 109.Circumventing neural damage in a C. elegans chemosensory circuit using genetically engineered synapsesCell Systems 12:263–271https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2020.12.003Google Scholar
- 110.Improved Mos1-mediated transgenesis in C. elegansNat Methods 9:117–118https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.1865Google Scholar
- 111.The endophilin curvature-sensitive motif requires electrostatic guidance to recycle synaptic vesicles in vivoDevelopmental Cell 57:750–766https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2022.02.021Google Scholar
- 112.Microinjection for precision genome editing in Caenorhabditis elegansSTAR Protocols 2https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xpro.2021.100748Google Scholar
- 113.High Efficiency, Homology-Directed Genome Editing in Caenorhabditis elegans Using CRISPR-Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein ComplexesGenetics 201:47–54https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.115.179382Google Scholar
- 114.NATF (Native and Tissue-Specific Fluorescence): A Strategy for Bright, Tissue-Specific GFP Labeling of Native Proteins in Caenorhabditis elegansGenetics 212:387–395https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.119.302063Google Scholar
- AFD Thermosensory Neurons mediate tactile-dependent Locomotion modulation in C. ElegansDryad Digital Repository https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.k3j9kd5pz
Article and author information
Author information
Version history
- Sent for peer review:
- Preprint posted:
- Reviewed Preprint version 1:
- Reviewed Preprint version 2:
Cite all versions
You can cite all versions using the DOI https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.106496. This DOI represents all versions, and will always resolve to the latest one.
Copyright
© 2025, Manuel Rosero & Jihong Bai
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
- views
- 528
- downloads
- 13
- citations
- 0
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.