Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Joel D Levine.
Behavioral and developmental sexual dimorphism in fruitflies is related to male-specific expression of protein isoforms encoded by the fruitless gene. A recent study shows that the wide-scale effects of fruitless are associated with differential functions of individual protein isoforms.
BACKGROUND: Associative memory formation requires that animals choose predictors for experiences they need to remember. When an artificial odor is paired with an aversive experience, that odor becomes the predictor. In more natural settings, however, animals can have multiple salient experiences that need to be remembered and prioritized. The mechanisms by which animals deal with multiple experiences are incompletely understood. RESULTS: Here we show that Drosophila males can be trained to discriminate between different types of female pheromones; they suppress courtship specifically to the type of female that was associated with unsuccessful courtship. Such "trainer-specific" learning is mediated by hydrocarbon olfactory cues and modifies the male's processing of those cues. Animals that are unable to use olfactory cues can still learn by using other sensory modalities, but memory in this case is not specific to the trainer female's maturation state. Concurrent and serial presentation of different pheromones demonstrates that the ability to consolidate memory of pheromonal cues can be modified by the temporal order in which they appear. CONCLUSION: Suppression of memory by new learning demonstrates that the dynamics of memory consolidation are subject to plasticity in Drosophila. This type of metaplasticity is essential for navigation of experience-rich natural environments.
In Drosophila, two intersecting molecular loops constitute an autoregulatory mechanism that oscillates with a period close to 24 hr. These loops touch when proteins from one loop, PERIOD (PER) and TIMELESS (TIM), repress the transcription of their parent genes, period (per) and timeless (tim), by blocking positive transcription factors from the other loop. The arrival of PER and TIM into the nucleus of a clock cell marks the timing of this interaction between the two loops; thus, control of PER:TIM nuclear accumulation is a central component of the molecular model of clock function. If a light pulse occurs early in the night as the heterodimer accumulates in the nucleus of clock cells, TIM is degraded, PER is destabilized, and clock time is delayed. Alternatively, if TIM is degraded during the later part of the night, after peak accumulation, clock time advances. Current models state that the effect of a light pulse depends on the state of the PER:TIM oscillation, which turns on the changing levels of TIM. However, previous studies have shown that light:dark (LD) regimes mimicking seasonal changes cause behavioral adjustments while altering clock gene expression. This should be reflected in the adjustment of PER and TIM dynamics. We manipulated LD cycles to assess the effects of altered day length on PER and TIM dynamics in clock cells within the central brain as well as light-induced resetting of locomotor rhythms.
The investigation of circadian clock function in Drosophila has progressed from the identification of clock genes to the analysis of timing mechanisms in the cells and tissues where these genes are expressed. As the biological context for investigating circadian clock systems is expanded, new features of molecular timing mechanisms are becoming apparent. Examples come first from studies on peripheral clocks, which perform local, tissue-specific functions as well as global functions that relate to the control of individual behavior, and second from the evaluation of social influences on circadian rhythms. The identification of inter-organismal components of the circadian system in Drosophila suggests new perspectives as the progression continues from the systems level to the social level and onwards to the level of ecosystems.
Robust self-sustained oscillations are a ubiquitous characteristic of circadian rhythms. These include Drosophila locomotor activity rhythms, which persist for weeks in constant darkness (DD). Yet the molecular oscillations that underlie circadian rhythms damp rapidly in many Drosophila tissues. Although much progress has been made in understanding the biochemical and cellular basis of circadian rhythms, the mechanisms that underlie the differences between damped and self-sustaining oscillations remain largely unknown. A small cluster of neurons in adult Drosophila brain, the ventral lateral neurons (LN(v)s), is essential for self-sustained behavioral rhythms and has been proposed to be the primary pacemaker for locomotor activity rhythms. With an LN(v)-specific driver, we restricted functional clocks to these neurons and showed that they are not sufficient to drive circadian locomotor activity rhythms. Also contrary to expectation, we found that all brain clock neurons manifest robust circadian oscillations of timeless and cryptochrome RNA for many days in DD. This persistent molecular rhythm requires pigment-dispersing factor (PDF), an LN(v)-specific neuropeptide, because the molecular oscillations are gradually lost when Pdf(01) mutant flies are exposed to free-running conditions. This observation precisely parallels the previously reported effect on behavioral rhythms of the Pdf(01) mutant. PDF is likely to affect some clock neurons directly, since the peptide appears to bind to the surface of many clock neurons, including the LN(v)s themselves. We showed that the brain circadian clock in Drosophila is clearly distinguishable from the eyes and other rapidly damping peripheral tissues, as it sustains robust molecular oscillations in DD. At the same time, different clock neurons are likely to work cooperatively within the brain, because the LN(v)s alone are insufficient to support the circadian program. Based on the damping results with Pdf(01) mutant flies, we propose that LN(v)s, and specifically the PDF neuropeptide that it synthesizes, are important in coordinating a circadian cellular network within the brain. The cooperative function of this network appears to be necessary for maintaining robust molecular oscillations in DD and is the basis of sustained circadian locomotor activity rhythms.
Circadian clocks are important regulators of behavior and physiology. The circadian clock of Drosophila depends on an autoinhibitory feedback loop involving dCLOCK, CYCLE (also called dBMAL, for Drosophila brain and muscle ARNT-like protein), dPERIOD, and dTIMELESS. Recent studies suggest that the clock mechanism in other insect species may differ strikingly from that of Drosophila. We cloned Clock, Bmal, and Timeless homologs (apClock, apBmal, and apTimeless) from the silkmoth Antheraea pernyi, from which a Period homolog (apPeriod) has already been cloned. In Schneider 2 (S2) cell culture assays, apCLOCK:apBMAL activates transcription through an E-box enhancer element found in the 5' region of the apPeriod gene. Furthermore, apPERIOD can robustly inhibit apCLOCK: apBMAL-mediated transactivation, and apTIMELESS can augment this inhibition. Thus, a complete feedback loop, resembling that found in Drosophila, can be constructed from silkmoth CLOCK, BMAL, PERIOD, and TIMELESS. Our results suggest that the circadian autoinhibitory feedback loop discovered in Drosophila is likely to be widespread among insects. However, whereas the transactivation domain in Drosophila lies in the C terminus of dCLOCK, in A. pernyi, it lies in the C terminus of apBMAL, which is highly conserved with the C termini of BMALs in other insects (except Drosophila) and in vertebrates. Our analysis sheds light on the molecular function and evolution of clock genes in the animal kingdom.
Circadian clocks are influenced by social interactions in a variety of species, but little is known about the sensory mechanisms underlying these effects. We investigated whether social cues could reset circadian rhythms in Drosophila melanogaster by addressing two questions: Is there a social influence on circadian timing? If so, then how is that influence communicated? The experiments show that in a social context Drosophila transmit and receive cues that influence circadian time and that these cues are likely olfactory.
BACKGROUND: Previously, we reported effects of the cry(b) mutation on circadian rhythms in period and timeless gene expression within isolated peripheral Drosophila tissues. We relied on luciferase activity driven by the respective regulatory genomic elements to provide real-time reporting of cycling gene expression. Subsequently, we developed a tool kit for the analysis of behavioral and molecular cycles. Here, we use these tools to analyze our earlier results as well as additional data obtained using the same experimental designs. RESULTS: Isolated antennal pairs, heads, bodies, wings and forelegs were evaluated under light-dark cycles. In these conditions, the cry(b) mutation significantly decreases the number of rhythmic specimens in each case except the wing. Moreover, among those specimens with detectable rhythmicity, mutant rhythms are significantly weaker than cry+ controls. In addition, cry(b) alters the phase of period gene expression in these tissues. Furthermore, peak phase of luciferase-reported period and timeless expression within cry+ samples is indistinguishable in some tissues, yet significantly different in others. We also analyze rhythms produced by antennal pairs in constant conditions. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses further show that circadian clock mechanisms in Drosophila may vary in a tissue-specific manner, including how the cry gene regulates circadian gene expression.
BACKGROUND: Circadian clocks are biological oscillators that regulate molecular, physiological, and behavioral rhythms in a wide variety of organisms. While behavioral rhythms are typically monitored over many cycles, a similar approach to molecular rhythms was not possible until recently; the advent of real-time analysis using transgenic reporters now permits the observations of molecular rhythms over many cycles as well. This development suggests that new details about the relationship between molecular and behavioral rhythms may be revealed. Even so, behavioral and molecular rhythmicity have been analyzed using different methods, making such comparisons difficult to achieve. To address this shortcoming, among others, we developed a set of integrated analytical tools to unify the analysis of biological rhythms across modalities. RESULTS: We demonstrate an adaptation of digital signal analysis that allows similar treatment of both behavioral and molecular data from our studies of Drosophila. For both types of data, we apply digital filters to extract and clarify details of interest; we employ methods of autocorrelation and spectral analysis to assess rhythmicity and estimate the period; we evaluate phase shifts using crosscorrelation; and we use circular statistics to extract information about phase. CONCLUSION: Using data generated by our investigation of rhythms in Drosophila we demonstrate how a unique aggregation of analytical tools may be used to analyze and compare behavioral and molecular rhythms. These methods are shown to be versatile and will also be adaptable to further experiments, owing in part to the non-proprietary nature of the code we have developed.