Publications

Although patients with primary insomnia experience sleep disruption, they are able to maintain normal performance on a variety of cognitive tasks. This observation suggests that insomnia may be a condition where predisposing factors simultaneously increase the risk for insomnia and also mitigate against the deleterious consequences of waking. To gain insight into processes that might regulate sleep and buffer neuronal circuits during sleep loss, we manipulated three genes, fat facet (faf), highwire (hiw) and the GABA receptor Resistance to dieldrin (Rdl), that were differentially modulated in a Drosophila model of insomnia. Our results indicate that increasing faf and decreasing hiw or Rdl within wake-promoting large ventral lateral clock neurons (lLNvs) induces sleep loss. As expected, sleep loss induced by decreasing hiw in the lLNvs results in deficits in short-term memory and increases of synaptic growth. However, sleep loss induced by knocking down Rdl in the lLNvs protects flies from sleep-loss induced deficits in short-term memory and increases in synaptic markers. Surprisingly, decreasing hiw and Rdl within the Mushroom Bodies (MBs) protects against the negative effects of sleep deprivation (SD) as indicated by the absence of a subsequent homeostatic response, or deficits in short-term memory. Together these results indicate that specific genes are able to disrupt sleep and protect against the negative consequences of waking in a circuit dependent manner.

Inactivation of a group of sleep-promoting neurons through dopamine signalling can cause acute or chronic wakefulness in flies, depending on changes in three different potassium-channel proteins. See Letter p.333

Individuals frequently find themselves confronted with a variety of challenges that threaten their wellbeing. While some individuals face these challenges efficiently and thrive (resilient) others are unable to cope and may suffer persistent consequences (vulnerable). Resilience/vulnerability to sleep disruption may contribute to the vulnerability of individuals exposed to challenging conditions. With that in mind we exploited individual differences in a fly’s ability to form short-term memory (STM) following 3 different types of sleep disruption to identify the underlying genes. Our analysis showed that in each category of flies examined, there are individuals that form STM in the face of sleep loss (resilient) while other individuals show dramatic declines in cognitive behavior (vulnerable). Molecular genetic studies revealed that Antimicrobial Peptides, factors important for innate immunity, were candidates for conferring resilience/vulnerability to sleep deprivation. Specifically, Metchnikowin (Mtk), drosocin (dro) and Attacin (Att) transcript levels seemed to be differentially increased by sleep deprivation in glia (Mtk), neurons (dro) or primarily in the head fat body (Att). Follow-up genetic studies confirmed that expressing Mtk in glia but not neurons, and expressing dro in neurons but not glia, disrupted memory while modulating sleep in opposite directions. These data indicate that various factors within glia or neurons can contribute to individual differences in resilience/vulnerability to sleep deprivation.

Summary Given the role that sleep plays in modulating plasticity, we hypothesized that increasing sleep would restore memory to canonical memory mutants without specifically rescuing the causal molecular lesion. Sleep was increased using three independent strategies: activating the dorsal fan-shaped body, increasing the expression of Fatty acid binding protein (dFabp), or by administering the GABA-A agonist 4,5,6,7-tetrahydroisoxazolo-[5,4-c]pyridine-3-ol (THIP). Short-term memory (STM) or long-term memory (LTM) was evaluated in rutabaga (rut) and dunce (dnc) mutants using aversive phototaxic suppression and courtship conditioning. Each of the three independent strategies increased sleep and restored memory to rut and dnc mutants. Importantly, inducing sleep also reverses memory defects in a Drosophila model of Alzheimer’s disease. Together, these data demonstrate that sleep plays a more fundamental role in modulating behavioral plasticity than previously appreciated and suggest that increasing sleep may benefit patients with certain neurological disorders.

Drosophila has proven to be a powerful model to identify genes and circuits that impact sleep. While the majority of studies have primarily been interested in identifying manipulations that alter sleep time, a growing body of work has begun to focus on how changing sleep influences functional outcomes such as cognitive performance, structural plasticity, and metabolism to name a few. Evaluating sleep time provides an appropriate entry point into elucidating sleep function. However, it is not possible to fully understand how a manipulation has impacted sleep regulation without first establishing how it has affected the animals’ well-being. Synaptic plasticity and memory are important functional outcomes that can be used to asses an animal’s status. In this manuscript, we review recent advances in studies examining sleep, memory, and performance. We conclude that as Drosophila sleep researchers expand their analysis beyond sleep time, the opportunities to discover the function of sleep will be enhanced.

Summary In mammals, evidence for memory reactivation during sleep highlighted the important role that sleep plays in memory consolidation. A new study reports that memory reactivation is evolutionarily conserved and can also be found in the honeybee.

Summary Background In the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, interlocked negative transcription/translation feedback loops provide the core of the circadian clock that generates rhythmic phenotypes. Although the current molecular model portrays the oscillator as cell autonomous, cross-talk among clock neurons is essential for robust cycling behavior. Nevertheless, the functional organization of the neuronal network remains obscure. Results Here we show that shortening or lengthening of the circadian period of locomotor activity can be obtained either by targeting different groups of clock cells with the same genetic manipulation or by challenging the same group of cells with activators and repressors of neuronal excitability. Conclusions Based on these observations we interpret circadian rhythmicity as an emerging property of the circadian network and we propose an initial model for its architectural design.

The blue-light sensitive photoreceptor cryptochrome (CRY) may act as a magneto-receptor through formation of radical pairs involving a triad of tryptophans. Previous genetic analyses of behavioral responses of Drosophila to electromagnetic fields using conditioning, circadian and geotaxis assays have lent some support to the radical pair model (RPM). Here, we describe a new method that generates consistent and reliable circadian responses to electromagnetic fields that differ substantially from those already reported. We used the Schuderer apparatus to isolate Drosophila from local environmental variables, and observe extremely low frequency (3 to 50 Hz) field-induced changes in two locomotor phenotypes, circadian period and activity levels. These field-induced phenotypes are CRY- and blue-light dependent, and are correlated with enhanced CRY stability. Mutational analysis of the terminal tryptophan of the triad hypothesised to be indispensable to the electron transfer required by the RPM reveals that this residue is not necessary for field responses. We observe that deletion of the CRY C-terminus dramatically attenuates the EMF-induced period changes, whereas the N-terminus underlies the hyperactivity. Most strikingly, an isolated CRY C-terminus that does not encode the Tryptophan triad nor the FAD binding domain is nevertheless able to mediate a modest EMF-induced period change. Finally, we observe that hCRY2, but not hCRY1, transformants can detect EMFs, suggesting that hCRY2 is blue light-responsive. In contrast, when we examined circadian molecular cycles in wild-type mouse suprachiasmatic nuclei slices under blue light, there was no field effect. Our results are therefore not consistent with the classical Trp triad-mediated RPM and suggest that CRYs act as blue-light/EMF sensors depending on trans-acting factors that are present in particular cellular environments.

The C-terminus of cryptochrome (CRY) regulates light responses in Drosophila. These include the light-dependent binding of Drosophila dCRY to the clock proteins PERIOD and TIMELESS in a yeast two-hybrid system, which we proved to be a convenient and reliable readout of the behavior of dCRY in vivo. In this study, we present a combination of in silico analysis and experimental validation in yeast, to identify novel functional motifs in the C-terminal region of dCRY. Our results suggest that linear motifs are present in this small region, which is a likely hotspot for molecular interactions.

The Drosophila melanogaster circadian clock is generated by interlocked feedback loops, and null mutations in core genes such as period and timeless generate behavioral arrhythmicity in constant darkness. In light-dark cycles, the elevation in locomotor activity that usually anticipates the light on or off signals is severely compromised in these mutants. Light transduction pathways mediated by the rhodopsins and the dedicated circadian blue light photoreceptor cryptochrome are also critical in providing the circadian clock with entraining light signals from the environment. The cryb mutation reduces the light sensitivity of the fly s clock, yet locomotor activity rhythms in constant darkness or light-dark cycles are relatively normal, because the rhodopsins compensate for the lack of cryptochrome function. Remarkably, when we combined a period-null mutation with cryb, circadian rhythmicity in locomotor behavior in light-dark cycles, as measured by a number of different criteria, was restored. This effect was significantly reduced in timeless-null mutant backgrounds. Circadian rhythmicity in constant darkness was not restored, and TIM protein did not exhibit oscillations in level or localize to the nuclei of brain neurons known to be essential for circadian locomotor activity. Therefore, we have uncovered residual rhythmicity in the absence of period gene function that may be mediated by a previously undescribed period-independent role for timeless in the Drosophila circadian pacemaker. Although we do not yet have a molecular correlate for these apparently iconoclastic observations, we provide a systems explanation for these results based on differential sensitivities of subsets of circadian pacemaker neurons to light.