Sean M. Buchanan

Behavioral idiosyncrasy reveals genetic control of phenotypic variability

Significance If we could rear genetically identical individuals from a variety of genetic backgrounds and rear them in the same environment, how much phenotypic variation between individuals of the same genotype would we see? Would different genetic backgrounds differ in their degree of variability? What would account for these differences? We used Drosophila inbred lines to address these questions focusing on variability in locomotor handedness. We show that different genotypes vary dramatically in their propensity for variability, that phenotypic variability itself, as a trait, can be heritable, and that loci affecting variability can be mapped. The genetic control of variability has received little attention in quantitative genetics despite the important role variability plays in explaining phenotypic variation between individuals. Quantitative genetics has primarily focused on describing genetic effects on trait means and largely ignored the effect of alternative alleles on trait variability, potentially missing an important axis of genetic variation contributing to phenotypic differences among individuals. To study the genetic effects on individual-to-individual phenotypic variability (or intragenotypic variability), we used Drosophila inbred lines and measured the spontaneous locomotor behavior of flies walking individually in Y-shaped mazes, focusing on variability in locomotor handedness, an assay optimized to measure variability. We discovered that some lines had consistently high levels of intragenotypic variability among individuals, whereas lines with low variability behaved as although they tossed a coin at each left/right turn decision. We demonstrate that the degree of variability is itself heritable. Using a genome-wide association study (GWAS) for the degree of intragenotypic variability as the phenotype across lines, we identified several genes expressed in the brain that affect variability in handedness without affecting the mean. One of these genes, Ten-a, implicates a neuropil in the central complex of the fly brain as influencing the magnitude of behavioral variability, a brain region involved in sensory integration and locomotor coordination. We validated these results using genetic deficiencies, null alleles, and inducible RNAi transgenes. Our study reveals the constellation of phenotypes that can arise from a single genotype and shows that different genetic backgrounds differ dramatically in their propensity for phenotypic variabililty. Because traditional mean-focused GWASs ignore the contribution of variability to overall phenotypic variation, current methods may miss important links between genotype and phenotype.

Phosphorylation of protocadherin proteins by the receptor tyrosine kinase Ret.

The clustered protocadherins (Pcdhs) are a large family of cadherin-like transmembrane proteins expressed in the nervous system. Stochastic expression of Pcdh genes and alternative splicing of their pre-mRNAs have the potential to generate enormous protein diversity at the cell surface of neurons. At present, the regulation and function of Pcdh proteins are largely unknown. Here, we show that Pcdhs form a heteromeric signaling complex(es), consisting of multiple Pcdh isoforms, receptor tyrosine kinases, phosphatases, and cell adhesion molecules. In particular, we find that the receptor tyrosine kinase rearranged during transformation (Ret) binds to Pcdhs in differentiated neuroblastoma cells and is required for stabilization and differentiation-induced phosphorylation of Pcdh proteins. In addition, the Ret ligand glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor induces phosphorylation of Pcdhγ in motor neurons and phosphorylation of Pcdhα and Pcdhγ in sympathetic neurons. Conversely, Pcdh proteins are also required for the stabilization of activated Ret in neuroblastoma cells and sympathetic ganglia. Thus, Pcdhs and Ret are functional components of a phosphorylation-dependent signaling complex.

Neuronal control of locomotor handedness in Drosophila

Significance Genetically identical individuals display variability in their behaviors even when reared in essentially identical environments. This variation underlies both personality and individuality, but there is little mechanistic understanding of how such differences arise. Here, we investigated individual-to-individual variation in locomotor behaviors of fruit flies. Surprisingly, individual flies exhibit significant bias in their left vs. right locomotor choices during exploratory locomotion, with some flies being strongly left biased or right biased. Using the Drosophila genetic toolkit, we find that the magnitude of locomotor handedness is under the control of neurons within a brain region implicated in motor planning and execution. This observation intriguingly implies that the brain may be able to dynamically regulate behavioral individuality. Genetically identical individuals display variability in their physiology, morphology, and behaviors, even when reared in essentially identical environments, but there is little mechanistic understanding of the basis of such variation. Here, we investigated whether Drosophila melanogaster displays individual-to-individual variation in locomotor behaviors. We developed a new high-throughout platform capable of measuring the exploratory behavior of hundreds of individual flies simultaneously. With this approach, we find that, during exploratory walking, individual flies exhibit significant bias in their left vs. right locomotor choices, with some flies being strongly left biased or right biased. This idiosyncrasy was present in all genotypes examined, including wild-derived populations and inbred isogenic laboratory strains. The biases of individual flies persist for their lifetime and are nonheritable: i.e., mating two left-biased individuals does not yield left-biased progeny. This locomotor handedness is uncorrelated with other asymmetries, such as the handedness of gut twisting, leg-length asymmetry, and wing-folding preference. Using transgenics and mutants, we find that the magnitude of locomotor handedness is under the control of columnar neurons within the central complex, a brain region implicated in motor planning and execution. When these neurons are silenced, exploratory laterality increases, with more extreme leftiness and rightiness. This observation intriguingly implies that the brain may be able to dynamically regulate behavioral individuality.

Biochemistry and Biology of GDF11 and Myostatin: Similarities, Differences, and Questions for Future Investigation.

Growth differentiation factor 11 (GDF11) and myostatin (or GDF8) are closely related members of the transforming growth factor β superfamily and are often perceived to serve similar or overlapping roles. Yet, despite commonalities in protein sequence, receptor utilization and signaling, accumulating evidence suggests that these 2 ligands can have distinct functions in many situations. GDF11 is essential for mammalian development and has been suggested to regulate aging of multiple tissues, whereas myostatin is a well-described negative regulator of postnatal skeletal and cardiac muscle mass and modulates metabolic processes. In this review, we discuss the biochemical regulation of GDF11 and myostatin and their functions in the heart, skeletal muscle, and brain. We also highlight recent clinical findings with respect to a potential role for GDF11 and/or myostatin in humans with heart disease. Finally, we address key outstanding questions related to GDF11 and myostatin dynamics and signaling during development, growth, and aging.Growth differentiation factor 11 (GDF11) and myostatin (or GDF8) are closely related members of the transforming growth factor β superfamily and are often perceived to serve similar or overlapping roles. Yet, despite commonalities in protein sequence, receptor utilization and signaling, accumulating evidence suggests that these 2 ligands can have distinct functions in many situations. GDF11 is essential for mammalian development and has been suggested to regulate aging of multiple tissues, whereas myostatin is a well-described negative regulator of postnatal skeletal and cardiac muscle mass and modulates metabolic processes. In this review, we discuss the biochemical regulation of GDF11 and myostatin and their functions in the heart, skeletal muscle, and brain. We also highlight recent clinical findings with respect to a potential role for GDF11 and/or myostatin in humans with heart disease. Finally, we address key outstanding questions related to GDF11 and myostatin dynamics and signaling during development, growth, and aging. # Response to Walker et al {#article-title-171}

Biochemistry and Biology of GDF11 and Myostatin

Growth differentiation factor 11 (GDF11) and myostatin (or GDF8) are closely related members of the transforming growth factor β superfamily and are often perceived to serve similar or overlapping roles. Yet, despite commonalities in protein sequence, receptor utilization and signaling, accumulating evidence suggests that these 2 ligands can have distinct functions in many situations. GDF11 is essential for mammalian development and has been suggested to regulate aging of multiple tissues, whereas myostatin is a well-described negative regulator of postnatal skeletal and cardiac muscle mass and modulates metabolic processes. In this review, we discuss the biochemical regulation of GDF11 and myostatin and their functions in the heart, skeletal muscle, and brain. We also highlight recent clinical findings with respect to a potential role for GDF11 and/or myostatin in humans with heart disease. Finally, we address key outstanding questions related to GDF11 and myostatin dynamics and signaling during development, growth, and aging.Growth differentiation factor 11 (GDF11) and myostatin (or GDF8) are closely related members of the transforming growth factor β superfamily and are often perceived to serve similar or overlapping roles. Yet, despite commonalities in protein sequence, receptor utilization and signaling, accumulating evidence suggests that these 2 ligands can have distinct functions in many situations. GDF11 is essential for mammalian development and has been suggested to regulate aging of multiple tissues, whereas myostatin is a well-described negative regulator of postnatal skeletal and cardiac muscle mass and modulates metabolic processes. In this review, we discuss the biochemical regulation of GDF11 and myostatin and their functions in the heart, skeletal muscle, and brain. We also highlight recent clinical findings with respect to a potential role for GDF11 and/or myostatin in humans with heart disease. Finally, we address key outstanding questions related to GDF11 and myostatin dynamics and signaling during development, growth, and aging. # Response to Walker et al {#article-title-171}

Proteolytic processing of protocadherin proteins requires endocytosis

The α-, β-, and γ-protocadherins (Pcdhα, Pcdhβ, and Pcdhγ) comprise a large family of single-pass transmembrane proteins predominantly expressed in the nervous system. These proteins contain six cadherin-like extracellular domains, and proteolysis of Pcdhα and Pcdhγ by the γ-secretase complex releases their intracellular domains into the cytoplasm where they may function locally and/or enter the nucleus and affect gene expression. Thus, cleavage of Pcdhs may function to link intercellular contacts and intracellular signaling. Here we report that shedding of the Pcdhα extracellular domain and subsequent processing by γ-secretase require endocytosis and that Pcdhs interact with the regulator of vesicular sorting ESCRT-0 in undifferentiated cells. We also find that the accumulation of Pcdh cleavage products is regulated during development. Differentiation leads to an increase in the interactions between Pcdh proteins and a decrease in the accumulation of cleavage products. We conclude that Pcdh processing requires endocytosis and that the level of cleavage products is regulated during neuronal differentiation.

Recovery of locomotion after injury in Drosophila melanogaster depends on proprioception.

ABSTRACT Locomotion is necessary for survival in most animal species. However, injuries to the appendages mediating locomotion are common. We assess the recovery of walking in Drosophila melanogaster following leg amputation. Whereas flies pre-amputation explore open arenas in a symmetric fashion on average, foreleg amputation induces a strong turning bias away from the side of the amputation. However, we find that unbiased walking behavior returns over time in wild-type flies, while recovery is significantly impaired in proprioceptive mutants. To identify the biomechanical basis of this locomotor impairment and recovery, we then examine individual leg motion (gait) at a fine scale. A minimal mathematical model that links neurodynamics to body mechanics during walking shows that redistributing leg forces between the right and left side enables the observed recovery. Altogether, our study suggests that proprioceptive input from the intact limbs plays a crucial role in the behavioral plasticity associated with locomotor recovery after injury. Summary: Proprioception plays a key role in the success of long-term recovery of unbiased walking behavior after leg amputation in Drosophila melanogaster.

A lineage-related reciprocal inhibition circuitry for sensory-motor action selection

The insect central complex and vertebrate basal ganglia are forebrain centres involved in selection and maintenance of behavioural actions. However, little is known about the formation of the underlying circuits, or how they integrate sensory information for motor actions. Here, we show that paired embryonic neuroblasts generate central complex ring neurons that mediate sensory-motor transformation and action selection in Drosophila. Lineage analysis resolves four ring neuron subtypes, R1-R4, that form GABAergic inhibition circuitry among inhibitory sister cells. Genetic manipulations, together with functional imaging, demonstrate subtype-specific R neurons mediate the selection and maintenance of behavioural activity. A computational model substantiates genetic and behavioural observations suggesting that R neuron circuitry functions as salience detector using competitive inhibition to amplify, maintain or switch between activity states. The resultant gating mechanism translates facilitation, inhibition and disinhibition of behavioural activity as R neuron functions into selection of motor actions and their organisation into action sequences.

Single-cell transcriptomics of the aged mouse brain reveals convergent, divergent and unique aging signatures

The mammalian brain is complex, with multiple cell types performing a variety of diverse functions, but exactly how the brain is affected with aging remains largely unknown. Here we performed a single-cell transcriptomic analysis of young and old mouse brains. We provide a comprehensive dataset of aging-related genes, pathways and ligand-receptor interactions in nearly all brain cell types. Our analysis identified gene signatures that vary in a coordinated manner across cell types and gene sets that are regulated in a cell type specific manner, even at times in opposite directions. Thus, our data reveals that aging, rather than inducing a universal program drives a distinct transcriptional course in each cell population. These data provide an important resource for the aging community and highlight key molecular processes, including ribosomal biogenesis, underlying aging. We believe that this large-scale dataset, which is publicly accessible online (aging-mouse-brain), will facilitate additional discoveries directed towards understanding and modifying the aging process.

Biochemistry and Biology of GDF11 and MyostatinResponse to Walker et al

Growth differentiation factor 11 (GDF11) and myostatin (or GDF8) are closely related members of the transforming growth factor β superfamily and are often perceived to serve similar or overlapping roles. Yet, despite commonalities in protein sequence, receptor utilization and signaling, accumulating evidence suggests that these 2 ligands can have distinct functions in many situations. GDF11 is essential for mammalian development and has been suggested to regulate aging of multiple tissues, whereas myostatin is a well-described negative regulator of postnatal skeletal and cardiac muscle mass and modulates metabolic processes. In this review, we discuss the biochemical regulation of GDF11 and myostatin and their functions in the heart, skeletal muscle, and brain. We also highlight recent clinical findings with respect to a potential role for GDF11 and/or myostatin in humans with heart disease. Finally, we address key outstanding questions related to GDF11 and myostatin dynamics and signaling during development, growth, and aging.Growth differentiation factor 11 (GDF11) and myostatin (or GDF8) are closely related members of the transforming growth factor β superfamily and are often perceived to serve similar or overlapping roles. Yet, despite commonalities in protein sequence, receptor utilization and signaling, accumulating evidence suggests that these 2 ligands can have distinct functions in many situations. GDF11 is essential for mammalian development and has been suggested to regulate aging of multiple tissues, whereas myostatin is a well-described negative regulator of postnatal skeletal and cardiac muscle mass and modulates metabolic processes. In this review, we discuss the biochemical regulation of GDF11 and myostatin and their functions in the heart, skeletal muscle, and brain. We also highlight recent clinical findings with respect to a potential role for GDF11 and/or myostatin in humans with heart disease. Finally, we address key outstanding questions related to GDF11 and myostatin dynamics and signaling during development, growth, and aging. # Response to Walker et al {#article-title-171}