The neuropeptide tachykinin is essential for pheromone detection in a gustatory neural circuit

  1. Shruti Shankar
  2. Jia Yi Chua
  3. Kah Junn Tan
  4. Meredith EK Calvert
  5. Ruifen Weng
  6. Wan Chin Ng
  7. Kenji Mori
  8. Joanne Y Yew  Is a corresponding author
  1. Temasek Life Sciences Laboratory, Singapore
  2. Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Singapore
  3. Toyo Gosei Co., Ltd, Japan

Abstract

Gustatory pheromones play an essential role in shaping the behavior of many organisms. However, little is known about the processing of taste pheromones in higher order brain centers. Here, we describe a male-specific gustatory circuit in Drosophila that underlies the detection of the anti-aphrodisiac pheromone (3R,11Z,19Z)-3-acetoxy-11,19-octacosadien-1-ol (CH503). Using behavioral analysis, genetic manipulation, and live calcium imaging, we show that Gr68a-expressing neurons on the forelegs of male flies exhibit a sexually-dimorphic physiological response to the pheromone and relay information to the central brain via peptidergic neurons. The release of tachykinin from 8-10 cells within the subesophageal zone is required for the pheromone-triggered courtship suppression. Taken together, this work describes a neuropeptide-modulated central brain circuit that underlies the programmed behavioral response to a gustatory sex pheromone. These results will allow further examination of the molecular basis by which innate behaviors are modulated by gustatory cues and physiological state.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Shruti Shankar

    Temasek Life Sciences Laboratory, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jia Yi Chua

    Temasek Life Sciences Laboratory, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Kah Junn Tan

    Temasek Life Sciences Laboratory, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Meredith EK Calvert

    Temasek Life Sciences Laboratory, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ruifen Weng

    Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Wan Chin Ng

    Temasek Life Sciences Laboratory, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Kenji Mori

    Photosensitive Materials Research Center, Toyo Gosei Co., Ltd, Chiba, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Joanne Y Yew

    Temasek Life Sciences Laboratory, Singapore, Singapore
    For correspondence
    jyew@hawaii.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Leslie C Griffith, Brandeis University, United States

Version history

  1. Received: February 8, 2015
  2. Accepted: June 16, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 17, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 6, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Shankar et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,633
    views
  • 776
    downloads
  • 45
    citations

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

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Shruti Shankar
  2. Jia Yi Chua
  3. Kah Junn Tan
  4. Meredith EK Calvert
  5. Ruifen Weng
  6. Wan Chin Ng
  7. Kenji Mori
  8. Joanne Y Yew
(2015)
The neuropeptide tachykinin is essential for pheromone detection in a gustatory neural circuit
eLife 4:e06914.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06914

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06914

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Ya-Hui Lin, Li-Wen Wang ... Li-An Chu
    Research Article

    Tissue-clearing and labeling techniques have revolutionized brain-wide imaging and analysis, yet their application to clinical formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) blocks remains challenging. We introduce HIF-Clear, a novel method for efficiently clearing and labeling centimeter-thick FFPE specimens using elevated temperature and concentrated detergents. HIF-Clear with multi-round immunolabeling reveals neuron circuitry regulating multiple neurotransmitter systems in a whole FFPE mouse brain and is able to be used as the evaluation of disease treatment efficiency. HIF-Clear also supports expansion microscopy and can be performed on a non-sectioned 15-year-old FFPE specimen, as well as a 3-month formalin-fixed mouse brain. Thus, HIF-Clear represents a feasible approach for researching archived FFPE specimens for future neuroscientific and 3D neuropathological analyses.

    1. Neuroscience
    Amanda Chu, Nicholas T Gordon ... Michael A McDannald
    Research Article

    Pavlovian fear conditioning has been extensively used to study the behavioral and neural basis of defensive systems. In a typical procedure, a cue is paired with foot shock, and subsequent cue presentation elicits freezing, a behavior theoretically linked to predator detection. Studies have since shown a fear conditioned cue can elicit locomotion, a behavior that - in addition to jumping, and rearing - is theoretically linked to imminent or occurring predation. A criticism of studies observing fear conditioned cue-elicited locomotion is that responding is non-associative. We gave rats Pavlovian fear discrimination over a baseline of reward seeking. TTL-triggered cameras captured 5 behavior frames/s around cue presentation. Experiment 1 examined the emergence of danger-specific behaviors over fear acquisition. Experiment 2 examined the expression of danger-specific behaviors in fear extinction. In total, we scored 112,000 frames for nine discrete behavior categories. Temporal ethograms show that during acquisition, a fear conditioned cue suppresses reward seeking and elicits freezing, but also elicits locomotion, jumping, and rearing - all of which are maximal when foot shock is imminent. During extinction, a fear conditioned cue most prominently suppresses reward seeking, and elicits locomotion that is timed to shock delivery. The independent expression of these behaviors in both experiments reveal a fear conditioned cue to orchestrate a temporally organized suite of behaviors.