Circadian disruption of memory consolidation in Drosophila

The role of the circadian system in memory formation is an important question in neurobiology. Despite this hypothesis being intuitively appealing, the existing data is confusing. Recent work in Drosophila has helped to clarify certain aspects of the problem, but the emerging sense is that the likely mechanisms are more complex than originally conceptualized. In this report, we identify a post-training window of time (during consolidation) when the circadian clock and its components are involved in memory formation. In the broader context, our data suggest that circadian biology might have multiple roles during memory formation. Testing for its roles at multiple timepoints, and in different cells, will be necessary to resolve some of the conflicting data.

CLOCKWORK ORANGE promotes CLOCK-CYCLE activation via the putative Drosophila ortholog of CLOCK INTERACTING PROTEIN CIRCADIAN

The Drosophila circadian clock is driven by a transcriptional feedback loop in which CLOCK-CYCLE (CLK-CYC) binds E-boxes to transcribe genes encoding the PERIOD-TIMELESS (PER-TIM) repressor, which releases CLK-CYC from E-boxes to inhibit transcription. CLOCKWORK ORANGE (CWO) reinforces PER-TIM repression by binding E-boxes to maintain PER-TIM bound CLK-CYC off DNA, but also promotes CLK-CYC transcription through an unknown mechanism. To determine how CWO activates CLK-CYC transcription, we identified CWO target genes that are upregulated in the absence of CWO repression, conserved in mammals, and preferentially expressed in brain pacemaker neurons. Among the genes identified was a putative ortholog of mouse Clock Interacting Protein Circadian (Cipc), which represses CLOCK-BMAL1 transcription. Reducing or eliminating Drosophila Cipc expression shortens period, while overexpressing Cipc lengthens period, which is consistent with previous work showing that Drosophila Cipc represses CLK-CYC transcription in S2 cells. Cipc represses CLK-CYC transcription in vivo, but not uniformly, as per is strongly repressed, tim less so, and vri hardly at all. Long period rhythms in cwo mutant flies are largely rescued when Cipc expression is reduced or eliminated, indicating that increased Cipc expression mediates the period lengthening of cwo mutants. Consistent with this behavioral rescue, eliminating Cipc rescues the decreased CLK-CYC transcription in cwo mutant flies, where per is strongly rescued, tim is moderately rescued, and vri shows little rescue. These results suggest a mechanism for CWO-dependent CLK-CYC activation: CWO inhibition of CIPC repression promotes CLK-CYC transcription. This mechanism may be conserved since cwo and Cipc perform analogous roles in the mammalian circadian clock.

Crosstalk between vrille transcripts, proteins, and regulatory elements controlling circadian rhythms and development in Drosophila

The vrille (vri) gene encodes a transcriptional repressor required for Drosophila development as well as circadian behavior in adults. Alternate first exons produce vri transcripts predicted to produce a short VRI isoform during development and long VRI in adults. A vri mutant (vri^Δ679) lacking long VRI transcripts is viable, confirming that short VRI is sufficient for developmental functions, yet behavioral rhythms in vri^Δ679 flies persist, showing that short VRI is sufficient for clock output. E-box regulatory elements that drive rhythmic long VRI transcript expression are required for developmental expression of short VRI transcripts. Surprisingly, long VRI transcripts primarily produce short VRI in adults, apparently due to a poor Kozak sequence context, demonstrating that short VRI drives circadian behavior. Thus, E-box-driven long VRI transcripts primarily control circadian rhythms via short VRI, whereas the same E-boxes drive short VRI transcripts that control developmental functions using short VRI.

•

vri-E mRNA is sufficient for Drosophila development and circadian behavior

•

E-boxes upstream of the vri-ADF promoter are required for Drosophila development

•

vri-ADF mRNAs primarily produce short VRI protein rather than long VRI protein

•

Short VRI protein primarily controls Drosophila development and circadian behavior

Proteomic analysis of Drosophila CLOCK complexes identifies rhythmic interactions with SAGA and Tip60 complex component NIPPED-A

Circadian clocks keep time via ~ 24 h transcriptional feedback loops. In Drosophila, CLOCK-CYCLE (CLK-CYC) activators and PERIOD-TIMELESS (PER-TIM) repressors are feedback loop components whose transcriptional status varies over a circadian cycle. Although changes in the state of activators and repressors has been characterized, how their status is translated to transcriptional activity is not understood. We used mass spectrometry to identify proteins that interact with GFP-tagged CLK (GFP-CLK) in fly heads at different times of day. Many expected and novel interacting proteins were detected, of which several interacted rhythmically and were potential regulators of protein levels, activity or transcriptional output. Genes encoding these proteins were tested to determine if they altered circadian behavior via RNAi knockdown in clock cells. The NIPPED-A protein, a scaffold for the SAGA and Tip60 histone modifying complexes, interacts with GFP-CLK as transcription is activated, and reducing Nipped-A expression lengthens circadian period. RNAi analysis of other SAGA complex components shows that the SAGA histone deubiquitination (DUB) module lengthened period similarly to Nipped-A RNAi knockdown and weakened rhythmicity, whereas reducing Tip60 HAT expression drastically weakened rhythmicity. These results suggest that CLK-CYC binds NIPPED-A early in the day to promote transcription through SAGA DUB and Tip60 HAT activity.

VRILLE Controls PDF Neuropeptide Accumulation and Arborization Rhythms in Small Ventrolateral Neurons to Drive Rhythmic Behavior in Drosophila

In Drosophila, the circadian clock is comprised of transcriptional feedback loops that control rhythmic gene expression responsible for daily rhythms in physiology, metabolism, and behavior. The core feedback loop, which employs CLOCK-CYCLE (CLK-CYC) activators and PERIOD-TIMELESS (PER-TIM) repressors to drive rhythmic transcription peaking at dusk, is required for circadian timekeeping and overt behavioral rhythms. CLK-CYC also activates an interlocked feedback loop, which uses the PAR DOMAIN PROTEIN 1ε (PDP1ε) activator and the VRILLE (VRI) repressor to drive rhythmic transcription peaking at dawn. Although Pdp1ε mutants disrupt activity rhythms without eliminating clock function, whether vri is required for clock function and/or output is not known. Using a conditionally inactivatable transgene to rescue vri developmental lethality, we show that clock function persists after vri inactivation but that activity rhythms are abolished. The inactivation of vri disrupts multiple output pathways thought to be important for activity rhythms, including PDF accumulation and arborization rhythms in the small ventrolateral neuron (sLN_v) dorsal projection. These results demonstrate that vri acts as a key regulator of clock output and suggest that the primary function of the interlocked feedback loop in Drosophila is to drive rhythmic transcription required for overt rhythms.

Drosophila CRY Entrains Clocks in Body Tissues to Light and Maintains Passive Membrane Properties in a Non-clock Body Tissue Independent of Light

Circadian (∼24 hr) clocks regulate daily rhythms in physiology, metabolism, and behavior via cell-autonomous transcriptional feedback loops. In Drosophila, the blue-light photoreceptor CRYPTOCHROME (CRY) synchronizes these feedback loops to light:dark cycles by binding to and degrading TIMELESS (TIM) protein. CRY also acts independently of TIM in Drosophila to alter potassium channel conductance in arousal neurons after light exposure, and in many animals CRY acts independently of light to repress rhythmic transcription. CRY expression has been characterized in the Drosophila brain and eyes, but not in peripheral clock and non-clock tissues in the body. To investigate CRY expression and function in body tissues, we generated a GFP-tagged-cry transgene that rescues light-induced behavioral phase resetting in cry⁰³ mutant flies and sensitively reports GFP-CRY expression. In bodies, CRY is detected in clock-containing tissues including Malpighian tubules, where it mediates both light-dependent TIM degradation and clock function. In larval salivary glands, which lack clock function but are amenable to electrophysiological recording, CRY prevents membrane input resistance from falling to low levels in a light-independent manner. The ability of CRY to maintain high input resistance in these non-excitable cells also requires the K⁺ channel subunits Hyperkinetic, Shaker, and ether-a-go-go. These findings for the first time define CRY expression in Drosophila peripheral tissues and reveal that CRY acts together with K⁺ channels to maintain passive membrane properties in a non-clock-containing peripheral tissue independent of light.

CLOCKWORK ORANGE Enhances PERIOD Mediated Rhythms in Transcriptional Repression by Antagonizing E-box Binding by CLOCK-CYCLE

The Drosophila circadian oscillator controls daily rhythms in physiology, metabolism and behavior via transcriptional feedback loops. CLOCK-CYCLE (CLK-CYC) heterodimers initiate feedback loop function by binding E-box elements to activate per and tim transcription. PER-TIM heterodimers then accumulate, bind CLK-CYC to inhibit transcription, and are ultimately degraded to enable the next round of transcription. The timing of transcriptional events in this feedback loop coincide with, and are controlled by, rhythms in CLK-CYC binding to E-boxes. PER rhythmically binds CLK-CYC to initiate transcriptional repression, and subsequently promotes the removal of CLK-CYC from E-boxes. However, little is known about the mechanism by which CLK-CYC is removed from DNA. Previous studies demonstrated that the transcription repressor CLOCKWORK ORANGE (CWO) contributes to core feedback loop function by repressing per and tim transcription in cultured S2 cells and in flies. Here we show that CWO rhythmically binds E-boxes upstream of core clock genes in a reciprocal manner to CLK, thereby promoting PER-dependent removal of CLK-CYC from E-boxes, and maintaining repression until PER is degraded and CLK-CYC displaces CWO from E-boxes to initiate transcription. These results suggest a model in which CWO co-represses CLK-CYC transcriptional activity in conjunction with PER by competing for E-box binding once CLK-CYC-PER complexes have formed. Given that CWO orthologs DEC1 and DEC2 also target E-boxes bound by CLOCK-BMAL1, a similar mechanism may operate in the mammalian clock.

Circadian clocks: the tissue is the issue

The circadian clock uses a widely expressed pair of clock activators to drive tissue-specific rhythms in target gene expression. A new study sheds light on this tissue specificity by showing that binding of clock activators and tissue-specific transcription factors to closely associated target sites enables cooperative activation of target genes in different tissues.

Phosphorylation of a central clock transcription factor is required for thermal but not photic entrainment

Transcriptional/translational feedback loops drive daily cycles of expression in clock genes and clock-controlled genes, which ultimately underlie many of the overt circadian rhythms manifested by organisms. Moreover, phosphorylation of clock proteins plays crucial roles in the temporal regulation of clock protein activity, stability and subcellular localization. dCLOCK (dCLK), the master transcription factor driving cyclical gene expression and the rate-limiting component in the Drosophila circadian clock, undergoes daily changes in phosphorylation. However, the physiological role of dCLK phosphorylation is not clear. Using a Drosophila tissue culture system, we identified multiple phosphorylation sites on dCLK. Expression of a mutated version of dCLK where all the mapped phospho-sites were switched to alanine (dCLK-15A) rescues the arrythmicity of Clk^out flies, yet with an approximately 1.5 hr shorter period. The dCLK-15A protein attains substantially higher levels in flies compared to the control situation, and also appears to have enhanced transcriptional activity, consistent with the observed higher peak values and amplitudes in the mRNA rhythms of several core clock genes. Surprisingly, the clock-controlled daily activity rhythm in dCLK-15A expressing flies does not synchronize properly to daily temperature cycles, although there is no defect in aligning to light/dark cycles. Our findings suggest a novel role for clock protein phosphorylation in governing the relative strengths of entraining modalities by adjusting the dynamics of circadian gene expression.

Circadian clocks are synchronized to local time by daily cycles in light-dark and temperature. Although light is generally thought to be the most dominant entraining cue in nature, daily cycles in temperature are sufficient to synchronize clocks in a large range of organisms. In Drosophila, dCLOCK is a master circadian transcription factor that drives cyclical gene expression and is likely the rate-limiting component in the transcriptional/translational feedback loops that underlie the timekeeping mechanism. dCLOCK undergoes temporal changes in phosphorylation throughout a day, which is also observed for mammalian CLOCK. However, the role of CLOCK phosphorylation at the organismal level is still unclear. Using mass-spectrometry, we identified more than a dozen phosphorylation sites on dCLOCK. Blocking global phosphorylation of dCLOCK by mutating phospho-acceptor sites to alanine increases its abundance and transcriptional activity, leading to higher peak values and amplitudes in the mRNA rhythms of core clock genes, which likely explains the accelerated clock speed. Surprisingly, the clock-controlled daily activity rhythm fails to maintain synchrony with daily temperature cycles, although there is no observable defect in aligning to light/dark cycles. Our findings suggest a novel role for clock protein phosphorylation in governing the effective strengths of entraining modalities by adjusting clock amplitude.

Effects of TWIN-OF-EYELESS on Clock Gene Expression and Central-Pacemaker Neuron Development in Drosophila

Circadian oscillators are autonomous molecular rhythms that reside in cells to align whole-organism physiology and behavior to the 24-h day. In flies, as in mammals, the oscillator operates in cells that coexpress CLOCK (CLK) and CYCLE (CYC). Recent work in Drosophila has shown that CLK is unique in its ability to generate heterologous oscillators, indicating that Clk gene expression defines the circadian cell fate. Here, using standard in vitro and in vivo techniques, we show that TWIN-OF-EYELESS (TOY; dPax6) regulates Clk expression in small ventrolateral neurons (s-LN_vs) that coordinate sleep-wake cycles. Crucially, toy binds multiple sites at the Clk locus, is expressed independent of CLK-CYC in LN_vs, regulates CLK protein levels under optimal photoperiodic conditions, and sets clock-speed during endogenous free-run. Furthermore, TOY is necessary for the onset of Clk expression in LN_vs during embryogenesis. We propose that TOY contributes to a transcription complex that functions upstream of the oscillator to promote Clk expression in s-LN_vs.

Phosphorylation of the transcription activator CLOCK regulates progression through a ∼ 24-h feedback loop to influence the circadian period in Drosophila

Circadian (≅ 24 h) clocks control daily rhythms in metabolism, physiology, and behavior in animals, plants, and microbes. In Drosophila, these clocks keep circadian time via transcriptional feedback loops in which clock-cycle (CLK-CYC) initiates transcription of period (per) and timeless (tim), accumulating levels of PER and TIM proteins feed back to inhibit CLK-CYC, and degradation of PER and TIM allows CLK-CYC to initiate the next cycle of transcription. The timing of key events in this feedback loop are controlled by, or coincide with, rhythms in PER and CLK phosphorylation, where PER and CLK phosphorylation is high during transcriptional repression. PER phosphorylation at specific sites controls its subcellular localization, activity, and stability, but comparatively little is known about the identity and function of CLK phosphorylation sites. Here we identify eight CLK phosphorylation sites via mass spectrometry and determine how phosphorylation at these sites impacts behavioral and molecular rhythms by transgenic rescue of a new Clk null mutant. Eliminating phosphorylation at four of these sites accelerates the feedback loop to shorten the circadian period, whereas loss of CLK phosphorylation at serine 859 increases CLK activity, thereby increasing PER levels and accelerating transcriptional repression. These results demonstrate that CLK phosphorylation influences the circadian period by regulating CLK activity and progression through the feedback loop.

Circadian timekeeping and output mechanisms in animals

Daily rhythms in animal behavior, physiology and metabolism are driven by cell-autonomous clocks that are synchronized by environmental cycles, but maintain ∼24 hours rhythms even in the absence of environmental cues. These clocks keep time and control overt rhythms via interlocked transcriptional feedback loops, making it imperative to define the mechanisms that drive rhythmic transcription within these loops and on a genome-wide scale. Recent work identifies novel post-transcriptional and post-translational mechanisms that govern progression through these feedback loops to maintain a period of ∼24 hours. Likewise, new microarray and deep sequencing studies reveal interplay among clock activators, chromatin remodeling and RNA Pol II binding to set the phase of gene transcription and drive post-transcriptional regulatory systems that may greatly increase the proportion of genes that are under clock control. Despite great progress, gaps in our understanding of how feedback loop transcriptional programs maintain ∼24 hours cycles and drive overt rhythms remain.

Circadian rhythm of temperature preference and its neural control in Drosophila

A daily body temperature rhythm (BTR) is critical for the maintenance of homeostasis in mammals. Whereas mammals use internal energy to regulate body temperature, ectotherms typically regulate body temperature behaviorally [1]. Some ectotherms maintain homeostasis via a daily temperature preference rhythm (TPR) [2], but the underlying mechanisms are largely unknown. Here, we show that Drosophila exhibit a daily circadian clock-dependent TPR that resembles mammalian BTR. Pacemaker neurons critical for locomotor activity are not necessary for TPR; instead, the dorsal neuron 2 s (DN2s), whose function was previously unknown, is sufficient. This indicates that TPR, like BTR, is controlled independently from locomotor activity. Therefore, the mechanisms controlling temperature fluctuations in fly TPR and mammalian BTR may share parallel features. Taken together, our results reveal the existence of a novel DN2-based circadian neural circuit that specifically regulates TPR; thus, understanding the mechanisms of TPR will shed new light on the function and neural control of circadian rhythms.

Molecular genetic analysis of circadian timekeeping in Drosophila

A genetic screen for mutants that alter circadian rhythms in Drosophila identified the first clock gene-the period (per) gene. The per gene is a central player within a transcriptional feedback loop that represents the core mechanism for keeping circadian time in Drosophila and other animals. The per feedback loop, or core loop, is interlocked with the Clock (Clk) feedback loop, but whether the Clk feedback loop contributes to circadian timekeeping is not known. A series of distinct molecular events are thought to control transcriptional feedback in the core loop. The time it takes to complete these events should take much less than 24h, thus delays must be imposed at different steps within the core loop. As new clock genes are identified, the molecular mechanisms responsible for these delays have been revealed in ever-increasing detail and provide an in-depth accounting of how transcriptional feedback loops keep circadian time. The phase of these feedback loops shifts to maintain synchrony with environmental cycles, the most reliable of which is light. Although a great deal is known about cell-autonomous mechanisms of light-induced phase shifting by CRYPTOCHROME (CRY), much less is known about non-cell autonomous mechanisms. CRY mediates phase shifts through an uncharacterized mechanism in certain brain oscillator neurons and carries out a dual role as a photoreceptor and transcription factor in other tissues. Here, I review how transcriptional feedback loops function to keep time in Drosophila, how they impose delays to maintain a 24-h cycle, and how they maintain synchrony with environmental light:dark cycles. The transcriptional feedback loops that keep time in Drosophila are well conserved in other animals, thus what we learn about these loops in Drosophila should continue to provide insight into the operation of analogous transcriptional feedback loops in other animals.

Time to taste: circadian clock function in the Drosophila gustatory system

Circadian clocks keep time in the digestive, circulatory, reproductive, excretory and nervous systems even in absence of external cues. Central oscillators in the brain control locomotor activity of organisms ranging from fruit flies to man, but the functions of the clocks in peripheral nervous system are not well understood. The presence of autonomous peripheral oscillators in the major taste organ of Drosophila, the proboscis, prompted us to test whether gustatory responses are under control of the circadian clock. We find that synchronous rhythms in physiological and behavioral responses to attractive and aversive tastants are driven by oscillators in gustatory receptor neurons (GRNs); primary sensory neurons that carry taste information from the proboscis to the brain. During the middle of the night, high levels of G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 (GPRK2) in the GRNs suppresses tastant-evoked responses. Flies with disrupted gustatory clocks are hyperphagic and hyperactive, recapitulating behaviors typically seen under the stress of starvation. Temporal plasticity in innate behaviors should offer adaptive advantages to flies. In this Extra View article we discuss how oscillators inside GRNs regulate responsiveness to tastants and influence feeding, metabolism and general activity.

DN1(p) circadian neurons coordinate acute light and PDF inputs to produce robust daily behavior in Drosophila

BACKGROUND

Daily behaviors in animals are determined by the interplay between internal timing signals from circadian clocks and environmental stimuli such as light. How these signals are integrated to produce timely and adaptive behavior is unclear. The fruit fly Drosophila exhibits clock-driven activity increases that anticipate dawn and dusk and free-running rhythms under constant conditions. Flies also respond to the onset of light and dark with acute increases in activity.

RESULTS

Mutants of a novel ion channel, narrow abdomen (na), lack a robust increase in activity in response to light and show reduced anticipatory behavior and free-running rhythms, providing a genetic link between photic responses and circadian clock function. We used tissue-specific rescue of na to demonstrate a role for approximately 16-20 circadian pacemaker neurons, a subset of the posterior dorsal neurons 1 (DN1(p)s), in mediating the acute response to the onset of light as well as morning anticipatory behavior. Circadian pacemaker neurons expressing the neuropeptide PIGMENT-DISPERSING FACTOR (PDF) are especially important for morning anticipation and free-running rhythms and send projections to the DN1(p)s. We also demonstrate that DN1(p)Pdfr expression is sufficient to rescue, at least partially, Pdfr morning anticipation defects as well as defects in free-running rhythms, including those in DN1 molecular clocks. Additionally, these DN1 clocks in wild-type flies are more strongly reset to timing changes in PDF clocks than other pacemaker neurons, suggesting that they are direct targets.

CONCLUSIONS

Taking these results together, we demonstrate that the DN1(p)s lie at the nexus of PDF and photic signaling to produce appropriate daily behavior.

Light and temperature control the contribution of specific DN1 neurons to Drosophila circadian behavior

The brain of Drosophila melanogaster contains approximately 150 circadian neurons [1] functionally divided into morning and evening cells that control peaks in daily behavioral activity at dawn and dusk, respectively [2, 3]. The PIGMENT DISPERSING-FACTOR (PDF)-positive small ventral lateral neurons (sLN(v)s) promote morning behavior, whereas the PDF-negative sLN(v) and the dorsal lateral neurons (LN(d)s) generate evening activity. Much less is known about the approximately 120 dorsal neurons (DN1, 2, and 3). Using a Clk-GAL4 driver that specifically targets a subset of DN1s, we generated mosaic per(0) flies with clock function restored only in these neurons. We found that the Clk4.1M-GAL4-positive DN1s promote only morning activity under standard (high light intensity) light/dark cycles. Surprisingly, however, these circadian neurons generate a robust evening peak of activity under a temperature cycle in constant darkness. Using different light intensities and ambient temperatures, we resolved this apparent paradox. The DN1 behavioral output is under both photic and thermal regulation. High light intensity suppresses DN1-generated evening activity. Low temperature inhibits morning behavior, but it promotes evening activity under high light intensity. Thus, the Clk4.1M-GAL4-positive DN1s, or the neurons they target, integrate light and temperature inputs to control locomotor rhythms. Our study therefore reveals a novel mechanism contributing to the plasticity of circadian behavior.

Regulation of gustatory physiology and appetitive behavior by the Drosophila circadian clock

BACKGROUND

Circadian regulation of chemosensory processes is common in animals, but little is known about how circadian clocks control chemosensory systems or the consequences of rhythms in chemosensory system function. Taste is a major chemosensory gate used to decide whether or not an animal will eat, and the main taste organ in Drosophila, the proboscis, harbors autonomous circadian oscillators. Here we examine gustatory physiology, tastant-evoked appetitive behavior, and food ingestion to understand clock-dependent regulation of the Drosophila gustatory system.

RESULTS

Here we report that single-unit responses from labellar gustatory receptor neurons (GRNs) to attractive and aversive tastants show diurnal and circadian rhythms in spike amplitude, frequency, and duration across different classes of gustatory sensilla. Rhythms in electrophysiological responses parallel behavioral rhythms in proboscis extension reflex. Molecular oscillators in GRNs are necessary and sufficient for rhythms in gustatory responses and drive rhythms in G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 (GPRK2) expression that mediate rhythms in taste sensitivity. Eliminating clock function in certain GRNs increases feeding and locomotor activity, mimicking a starvation response.

CONCLUSIONS

Circadian clocks in GRNs control neuronal output and drive behavioral rhythms in taste responses that peak at a time of day when feeding is maximal in flies. Our results argue that oscillations in GPRK2 levels drive rhythms in gustatory physiology and behavior and that GRN clocks repress feeding. The similarity in gustatory system organization and feeding behavior in flies and mammals, as well as diurnal changes in taste sensitivity in humans, suggest that our results are relevant to the situation in humans.

Go contributes to olfactory reception in Drosophila melanogaster

Background

Seven-transmembrane receptors typically mediate olfactory signal transduction by coupling to G-proteins. Although insect odorant receptors have seven transmembrane domains like G-protein coupled receptors, they have an inverted membrane topology and function as ligand-gated cation channels. Consequently, the involvement of cyclic nucleotides and G proteins in insect odor reception is controversial. Since the heterotrimeric G_oα subunit is expressed in Drosophila olfactory receptor neurons, we reasoned that G_o acts together with insect odorant receptor cation channels to mediate odor-induced physiological responses.

Results

To test whether G_o dependent signaling is involved in mediating olfactory responses in Drosophila, we analyzed electroantennogram and single-sensillum recording from flies that conditionally express pertussis toxin, a specific inhibitor of G_o in Drosophila. Pertussis toxin expression in olfactory receptor neurons reversibly reduced the amplitude and hastened the termination of electroantennogram responses induced by ethyl acetate. The frequency of odor-induced spike firing from individual sensory neurons was also reduced by pertussis toxin. These results demonstrate that G_o signaling is involved in increasing sensitivity of olfactory physiology in Drosophila. The effect of pertussis toxin was independent of odorant identity and intensity, indicating a generalized involvement of G_o in olfactory reception.

Conclusion

These results demonstrate that G_o is required for maximal physiological responses to multiple odorants in Drosophila, and suggest that OR channel function and G-protein signaling are required for optimal physiological responses to odors.

CLOCK expression identifies developing circadian oscillator neurons in the brains of Drosophila embryos

BACKGROUND

The Drosophila circadian oscillator is composed of transcriptional feedback loops in which CLOCK-CYCLE (CLK-CYC) heterodimers activate their feedback regulators period (per) and timeless (tim) via E-box mediated transcription. These feedback loop oscillators are present in distinct clusters of dorsal and lateral neurons in the adult brain, but how this pattern of expression is established during development is not known. Since CLK is required to initiate feedback loop function, defining the pattern of CLK expression in embryos and larvae will shed light on oscillator neuron development.

RESULTS

A novel CLK antiserum is used to show that CLK expression in the larval CNS and adult brain is limited to circadian oscillator cells. CLK is initially expressed in presumptive small ventral lateral neurons (s-LNvs), dorsal neurons 2 s (DN2s), and dorsal neuron 1 s (DN1s) at embryonic stage (ES) 16, and this CLK expression pattern persists through larval development. PER then accumulates in all CLK-expressing cells except presumptive DN2s during late ES 16 and ES 17, consistent with the delayed accumulation of PER in adult oscillator neurons and antiphase cycling of PER in larval DN2s. PER is also expressed in non-CLK-expressing cells in the embryonic CNS starting at ES 12. Although PER expression in CLK-negative cells continues in ClkJrk embryos, PER expression in cells that co-express PER and CLK is eliminated.

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrate that brain oscillator neurons begin development during embryogenesis, that PER expression in non-oscillator cells is CLK-independent, and that oscillator phase is an intrinsic characteristic of brain oscillator neurons. These results define the temporal and spatial coordinates of factors that initiate Clk expression, imply that circadian photoreceptors are not activated until the end of embryogenesis, and suggest that PER functions in a different capacity before oscillator cell development is initiated.

Measuring circadian rhythms in olfaction using electroantennograms

Circadian clocks control daily rhythms in many behavioral, physiological, and metabolic processes. Despite remarkable advances in our understanding of the circadian timekeeping mechanism and how it responds to environmental cycles, relatively little is known about how the timekeeping mechanism regulates behavior, physiology, and metabolism. One of the most extensively characterized timekeeping mechanisms is that of Drosophila melanogaster. In this species, autonomous circadian clocks are found in many neuronal and nonneuronal tissues, including essentially all sensory structures. We have shown that sensory neurons in the antenna mediate a robust rhythm in electrophysiological responses to the food odorant ethyl acetate. This article describes how rhythms in olfactory responses are measured and provides a perspective on the generality of these rhythms and their regulation by the clock.

Spatial and circadian regulation of cry in Drosophila

In Drosophila, cryptochrome (cry) encodes a blue-light photoreceptor that mediates light input to circadian oscillators and sustains oscillator function in peripheral tissues. The levels of cry mRNA cycle with a peak at approximately ZT5, which is similar to the phase of Clock (Clk) mRNA cycling in Drosophila. To understand how cry spatial and circadian expression is regulated, a series of cry-Gal4 trans-genes containing different portions of cry upstream and intron 1 sequences were tested for spatial and circadian expression. In fly heads, cry upstream sequences drive constitutive expression in brain oscillator neurons, a novel group of nonoscillator cells in the optic lobe, and peripheral oscillator cells in eyes and antennae. In contrast, cry intron 1 drives rhythmic expression in eyes and antennae, but not brain oscillator neurons. These results demonstrate that intron 1 is sufficient for high-amplitude cry mRNA cycling, show that cry upstream sequences are sufficient for expression in brain oscillator neurons, and suggest that cry spatial and circadian expression are regulated by different elements.

The blue-light photoreceptor CRYPTOCHROME is expressed in a subset of circadian oscillator neurons in the Drosophila CNS

In the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, CRYPTOCHROME (CRY) functions as a photoreceptor to entrain circadian oscillators to light-dark cycles and as a transcription factor to maintain circadian oscillator function in certain peripheral tissues. Given the importance of CRY to circadian clock function, we expected this protein to be expressed in all oscillator cells, yet CRY cellular distribution and subcellular localization has not been firmly established. Here we investigate CRY spatial expression in the brain using a newly developed CRY antibody and a novel set of cry deletion mutants. We find that CRY is expressed in s-LNvs, l-LNvs, and a subset of LNds and DN1s, but not DN2s and DN3s. CRY is present in both the nucleus and the cytoplasm of these neurons, and its subcellular localization does not change over the circadian cycle. Although CRY is absent in DN2s and DN3s, cry promoter activity and/or cry mRNA accumulation can be detected in these neurons, suggesting that CRY levels are regulated posttranscriptionally. Oscillators in DN2s and DN3s entrain to environmental light-dark cycles, which implies that they are entrained indirectly by retinal photoreceptors, extraretinal photoreceptors, or other CRY-expressing cells.

Rhythmic E-box binding by CLK-CYC controls daily cycles in per and tim transcription and chromatin modifications

The Drosophila melanogaster circadian oscillator comprises interlocked per/tim and Clk transcriptional feedback loops. In the per/tim loop, CLK-CYC-dependent transcriptional activation is rhythmically repressed by PER or PER-TIM to control circadian gene expression that peaks around dusk. Here we show that rhythmic transcription of per and tim involves time-of-day-specific binding of CLK-CYC and associated cycles in chromatin modifications. Activation of per and tim transcription occurs in concert with CLK-CYC binding to upstream and/or intronic E-boxes, acetylation of histone H3-K9, and trimethylation of histone H3-K4. These events are associated with RNA polymerase II (Pol II) binding to the tim promoter and transcriptional elongation by Pol II that is constitutively bound to the per promoter. Repression of per and tim transcription is associated with PER-dependent reversal of these events. Rhythms in H3-K9 acetylation and H3-K4 trimethylation are also associated with CLOCK-BMAL1-dependent transcription in mammals, indicating that the mechanism that controls rhythmic transcription is a conserved feature of the circadian clock even though feedback repression is mediated by different proteins.

Spike amplitude of single-unit responses in antennal sensillae is controlled by the Drosophila circadian clock

Circadian changes in membrane potential and spontaneous firing frequency have been observed in microbial systems, invertebrates, and mammals. Oscillators in olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs) from Drosophila are both necessary and sufficient to sustain rhythms in electroanntenogram (EAG) responses, suggesting that odorant receptors (ORs) and/or OR-dependent processes are under clock control. We measured single-unit responses in different antennal sensillae from wild-type, clock mutant, odorant-receptor mutant, and G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 (Gprk2) mutant flies to examine the cellular and molecular mechanisms that drive rhythms in olfaction. Spontaneous spike amplitude, but not spontaneous or odor-induced firing frequency, is under clock control in ab1 and ab3 basiconic sensillae and T2 trichoid sensillae. Mutants lacking odorant receptors in dendrites display constant low spike amplitudes, and the reduction or increase of levels of GPRK2 in OSNs results in constant low or constant high spontaneous spike amplitudes, respectively. We conclude that spike amplitude is controlled by circadian clocks in basiconic and trichoid sensillae and requires GPRK2 expression and the presence of functional ORs in dendrites. These results argue that rhythms in GPRK2 levels control OR localization and OR-dependent ion channel activity and/or composition to mediate rhythms in spontaneous spike amplitude.

Disruption of the circadian clock within the cardiomyocyte influences myocardial contractile function, metabolism, and gene expression

Virtually every mammalian cell, including cardiomyocytes, possesses an intrinsic circadian clock. The role of this transcriptionally based molecular mechanism in cardiovascular biology is poorly understood. We hypothesized that the circadian clock within the cardiomyocyte influences diurnal variations in myocardial biology. We, therefore, generated a cardiomyocyte-specific circadian clock mutant (CCM) mouse to test this hypothesis. At 12 wk of age, CCM mice exhibit normal myocardial contractile function in vivo, as assessed by echocardiography. Radiotelemetry studies reveal attenuation of heart rate diurnal variations and bradycardia in CCM mice (in the absence of conduction system abnormalities). Reduced heart rate persisted in CCM hearts perfused ex vivo in the working mode, highlighting the intrinsic nature of this phenotype. Wild-type, but not CCM, hearts exhibited a marked diurnal variation in responsiveness to an elevation in workload (80 mmHg plus 1 μM epinephrine) ex vivo, with a greater increase in cardiac power and efficiency during the dark (active) phase vs. the light (inactive) phase. Moreover, myocardial oxygen consumption and fatty acid oxidation rates were increased, whereas cardiac efficiency was decreased, in CCM hearts. These observations were associated with no alterations in mitochondrial content or structure and modest mitochondrial dysfunction in CCM hearts. Gene expression microarray analysis identified 548 and 176 genes in atria and ventricles, respectively, whose normal diurnal expression patterns were altered in CCM mice. These studies suggest that the cardiomyocyte circadian clock influences myocardial contractile function, metabolism, and gene expression.

Rapid attenuation of circadian clock gene oscillations in the rat heart following ischemia-reperfusion

The intracellular circadian clock consists of a series of transcriptional modulators that together allow the cell to perceive the time of day. Circadian clocks have been identified within various components of the cardiovascular system (e.g. cardiomyocytes, vascular smooth muscle cells) and possess the potential to regulate numerous aspects of cardiovascular physiology and pathophysiology. The present study tested the hypothesis that ischemia/reperfusion (I/R; 30 min occlusion of the rat left main coronary artery in vivo) alters the circadian clock within the ischemic, versus non-ischemic, region of the heart. Left ventricular anterior (ischemic) and posterior (non-ischemic) regions were isolated from I/R, sham-operated, and naïve rats over a 24-h period, after which mRNAs encoding for both circadian clock components and known clock-controlled genes were quantified. Circadian clock gene oscillations (i.e. peak-to-trough fold differences) were rapidly attenuated in the I/R, versus the non-ischemic, region. Consistent with decreased circadian clock output, we observe a rapid induction of E4BP4 in the ischemic region of the heart at both the mRNA and protein levels. In contrast with I/R, chronic (1 week) hypobaric chamber-induced hypoxia did not attenuate oscillations in circadian clock genes in either the left or right ventricle of the rat heart. In conclusion, these data show that in a rodent model of myocardial I/R, circadian clocks within the ischemic region become rapidly impaired, through a mechanism that appears to be independent of hypoxia.

A DOUBLETIME kinase binding domain on the Drosophila PERIOD protein is essential for its hyperphosphorylation, transcriptional repression, and circadian clock function

A common feature of animal circadian clocks is the progressive phosphorylation of PERIOD (PER) proteins from hypo- to hyperphosphorylated species, events that are highly dependent on casein kinase 1 epsilon (termed DOUBLETIME [DBT] in Drosophila melanogaster) and necessary for normal clock progression. Drosophila PER (dPER) functions in the negative limb of the clockworks by presumably binding to the transcription factor CLOCK (CLK) and inhibiting its transactivation activity. Here, we identify a small region on dPER that is conserved with mammalian PERs and contains the major in vivo DBT binding domain, termed dPDBD (for dPER DBT binding domain). This domain is required for the manifestation of molecular and behavioral rhythms in vivo. In the absence of the dPDBD, the dPER protein is present at constant high levels throughout a daily cycle, undergoes little phosphorylation, and is severely impaired in its ability to function as a transcriptional repressor. Our findings indicate that the binding of dPER to CLK is not sufficient for transcriptional inhibition, implicating a more indirect mode of action whereby dPER acts as a molecular bridge to "deliver" DBT and/or other factors that directly repress CLK-dependent gene expression.

A functional genomics strategy reveals clockwork orange as a transcriptional regulator in the Drosophila circadian clock

The Drosophila circadian clock consists of integrated autoregulatory feedback loops, making the clock difficult to elucidate without comprehensively identifying the network components in vivo. Previous studies have adopted genome-wide screening for clock-controlled genes using high-density oligonucleotide arrays that identified hundreds of clock-controlled genes. In an attempt to identify the core clock genes among these candidates, we applied genome-wide functional screening using an RNA interference (RNAi) system in vivo. Here we report the identification of novel clock gene candidates including clockwork orange (cwo), a transcriptional repressor belonging to the basic helix-loop-helix ORANGE family. cwo is rhythmically expressed and directly regulated by CLK-CYC through canonical E-box sequences. A genome-wide search for its target genes using the Drosophila genome tiling array revealed that cwo forms its own negative feedback loop and directly suppresses the expression of other clock genes through the E-box sequence. Furthermore, this negative transcriptional feedback loop contributes to sustaining a high-amplitude circadian oscillation in vivo. Based on these results, we propose that the competition between cyclic CLK-CYC activity and the adjustable threshold imposed by CWO keeps E-box-mediated transcription within the controllable range of its activity, thereby rendering a Drosophila circadian clock capable of generating high-amplitude oscillation.

Use of firefly luciferase activity assays to monitor circadian molecular rhythms in vivo and in vitro

Circadian rhythms in metabolic, physiological, and behavioral processes are regulated by biological clocks. Many of these rhythmic processes can be measured over many days or weeks using automated recording devices, thus making it possible to precisely calculate period, phase, and amplitude values. With the advent of luciferase reporter genes and machines capable of quantifying luciferase-generated bioluminescence over long time frames, it is now possible to precisely monitor the rhythms in gene expression that underlie circadian clock function. These assays can be used to monitor gene expression in large numbers of individual plants and animals, and/or various cultured tissues and cells. After acquiring bioluminescence data, rhythm analysis programs are used to calculate the period, phase, amplitude, and overall levels of gene expression for individuals or groups, and to measure their statistical significance. Here we will describe how luciferase assays are performed and analyzed to measure gene expression rhythms in Drosophila.

PDP1epsilon functions downstream of the circadian oscillator to mediate behavioral rhythms

The Drosophila circadian oscillator is composed of autoregulatory period/timeless (per/tim) and Clock (Clk) feedback loops that control rhythmic transcription. In the Clk loop, CLOCK-CYCLE heterodimers activate vrille (vri) and PAR domain protein 1epsilon (Pdp1epsilon) transcription, then sequential repression by VRI and activation by PDP1epsilon mediate rhythms in Clk transcription. Because VRI and PDP1epsilon bind the same regulatory element, the VRI/PDP1epsilon ratio is thought to control the level of Clk transcription. Thus, constant high or low PDP1epsilon levels in clock cells should eliminate Clk mRNA cycling and disrupt circadian oscillator function. Here we show that reducing PDP1epsilon levels in clock cells by approximately 70% via RNA interference or increasing PDP1epsilon levels by approximately 10-fold in clock cells does not alter Clk mRNA cycling or circadian oscillator function. However, constant low or high PDP1epsilon levels in clock cells disrupt locomotor activity rhythms despite persistent circadian oscillator function in brain pacemaker neurons that extend morphologically normal projections into the dorsal brain. These results demonstrate that the VRI/PDP1epsilon ratio neither controls Clk mRNA cycling nor circadian oscillator function and argue that PDP1epsilon is not essential for Clk activation. PDP1epsilon is nevertheless required for behavioral rhythmicity, which suggests that it functions to regulate oscillator output.

A role for the adult fat body in Drosophila male courtship behavior

Mating behavior in Drosophila depends critically on the sexual identity of specific regions in the brain, but several studies have identified courtship genes that express products only outside the nervous system. Although these genes are each active in a variety of non-neuronal cell types, they are all prominently expressed in the adult fat body, suggesting an important role for this tissue in behavior. To test its role in male courtship, fat body was feminized using the highly specific Larval serum protein promoter. We report here that the specific feminization of this tissue strongly reduces the competence of males to perform courtship. This effect is limited to the fat body of sexually mature adults as the feminization of larval fat body that normally persists in young adults does not affect mating. We propose that feminization of fat body affects the synthesis of male-specific secreted circulating proteins that influence the central nervous system. In support of this idea, we demonstrate that Takeout, a protein known to influence mating, is present in the hemolymph of adult males but not females and acts as a secreted protein.

Transcriptional feedback loop regulation, function, and ontogeny in Drosophila

The Drosophila circadian oscillator is composed of interlocked period/timeless (per/tim) and Clock (Clk) transcriptional feedback loops. These feedback loops drive rhythmic transcription having peaks at dawn and dusk during the daily cycle and function in the brain and a variety of peripheral tissues. To understand how the circadian oscillator keeps time and controls metabolic, physiological, and behavioral rhythms, we must determine how these feedback loops regulate rhythmic transcription, determine the relative importance of the per/tim and Clk feedback loops with regard to circadian oscillator function, and determine how these feedback loops come to be expressed in only certain tissues. Substantial insight into each of these issues has been gained from experiments performed in our lab and others and is summarized here.

Essential and expendable features of the circadian timekeeping mechanism

Circadian clocks control behavioral, physiological and metabolic rhythms via one or more transcriptional feedback loops. In animals, two conserved feedback loops are thought to keep circadian time by mediating rhythmic transcription in opposite phases of the circadian cycle. Recent work in cyanobacteria nevertheless demonstrates that rhythmic transcription is dispensable for circadian timekeeping, raising the possibility that some features of the transcriptional feedback loops in animals are also expendable. Indeed, one of the two feedback loops is not necessary for circadian timekeeping in animals, but rhythmic transcription and post-translational modifications are both essential for keeping circadian time. These results not only confirm additional requirements within the animal circadian timekeeping mechanism, but also raise important questions about the function of conserved, yet expendable, features of the circadian timekeeping mechanism in animals.

The circadian clock within the cardiomyocyte is essential for responsiveness of the heart to fatty acids

Cells/organs must respond both rapidly and appropriately to increased fatty acid availability; failure to do so is associated with the development of skeletal muscle and hepatic insulin resistance, pancreatic beta-cell dysfunction, and myocardial contractile dysfunction. Here we tested the hypothesis that the intrinsic circadian clock within the cardiomyocytes of the heart allows rapid and appropriate adaptation of this organ to fatty acids by investigating the following: 1) whether circadian rhythms in fatty acid responsiveness persist in isolated adult rat cardiomyocytes, and 2) whether manipulation of the circadian clock within the heart, either through light/dark (L/D) cycle or genetic disruptions, impairs responsiveness of the heart to fasting in vivo. We report that both the intramyocellular circadian clock and diurnal variations in fatty acid responsiveness observed in the intact rat heart in vivo persist in adult rat cardiomyocytes. Reversal of the 12-h/12-h L/D cycle was associated with a re-entrainment of the circadian clock within the rat heart, which required 5-8 days for completion. Fasting rats resulted in the induction of fatty acid-responsive genes, an effect that was dramatically attenuated 2 days after L/D cycle reversal. Similarly, a targeted disruption of the circadian clock within the heart, through overexpression of a dominant negative CLOCK mutant, severely attenuated induction of myocardial fatty acid-responsive genes during fasting. These studies expose a causal relationship between the circadian clock within the cardiomyocyte with responsiveness of the heart to fatty acids and myocardial triglyceride metabolism.

Circadian transcription: passing the HAT to CLOCK

In animals, the circadian timekeeping mechanism relies on the coordinated activities of activators and repressors to control rhythmic transcription. In this issue of Cell, Doi et al. (2006) reveal that rhythms in histone acetylation are necessary for rhythmic transcription and that the histone acetyl transferase responsible is CLOCK, a key transcription factor that is essential for circadian oscillator function.

Drosophila CLOCK is constitutively expressed in circadian oscillator and non-oscillator cells

CLOCK (CLK) is a core component of the transcriptional feedback loops that comprise the circadian timekeeping mechanism in Drosophila. As a heterodimer with CYCLE (CYC), CLK binds E-boxes to activate the transcription of rhythmically expressed genes within and downstream of the circadian clock, but this activation unexpectedly occurs at times when CLK is at its lowest levels on Western blots. Recent studies demonstrate that CLK also regulates nonrhythmic gene expression and behaviors. Despite the critical roles CLK plays within and outside the circadian clock, its spatial expression pattern has not been characterized. Using a newly developed CLK antibody, the authors show that CLK is coexpressed with PERIOD (PER) in canonical oscillator cells throughout the head and body. In contrast to PER, however, the levels of CLK immunoreactivity do not cycle in intensity, CLK is detected primarily in the nucleus throughout the circadian cycle, and CLK is expressed in non-oscillator cells within the lateral and dorsal brain, including Kenyon cells, which mediate various forms of learning and memory. These results indicate that constitutive levels of nuclear CLK regulate rhythmic transcription in circadian oscillator cells and suggest that CLK contributes to other behavioral processes by regulating gene expression in non-oscillator cells.

PER-dependent rhythms in CLK phosphorylation and E-box binding regulate circadian transcription

Transcriptional activation by CLOCK-CYCLE (CLK-CYC) heterodimers and repression by PERIOD-TIMELESS (PER-TIM) heterodimers are essential for circadian oscillator function in Drosophila. PER-TIM was previously found to interact with CLK-CYC to repress transcription, and here we show that this interaction inhibits binding of CLK-CYC to E-box regulatory elements in vivo. Coincident with the interaction between PER-TIM and CLK-CYC is the hyperphosphorylation of CLK. This hyperphosphorylation occurs in parallel with the PER-dependent entry of DOUBLE-TIME (DBT) kinase into a complex with CLK-CYC, where DBT destabilizes both CLK and PER. Once PER and CLK are degraded, a novel hypophosphorylated form of CLK accumulates in parallel with E-box binding and transcriptional activation. These studies suggest that PER-dependent rhythms in CLK phosphorylation control rhythms in E-box-dependent transcription and CLK stability, thus linking PER and CLK function during the circadian cycle and distinguishing the transcriptional feedback mechanism in flies from that in mammals.

The circadian timekeeping system of Drosophila

Daily rhythms in behavior, physiology and metabolism are controlled by endogenous circadian clocks. At the heart of these clocks is a circadian oscillator that keeps circadian time, is entrained by environmental cues such as light and activates rhythmic outputs at the appropriate time of day. Genetic and molecular analyses in Drosophila have revealed important insights into the molecules and mechanisms underlying circadian oscillator function in all organisms. In this review I will describe the intracellular feedback loops that form the core of the Drosophila circadian oscillator and consider how they are entrained by environmental light cycles, where they operate within the fly and how they are thought to control overt rhythms in physiology and behavior. I will also discuss where work remains to be done to give a comprehensive picture of the circadian clock in Drosophila and likely many other organisms.

A Drosophila nonvisual arrestin is required for the maintenance of olfactory sensitivity

Nonvisual arrestins are a family of multifunctional adaptor molecules that regulate the activities of diverse families of receptors including G protein-coupled receptors, frizzled, and transforming growth factor-beta receptors. These activities indicate broad roles in both physiology and development for nonvisual arrestins. Drosophila melanogaster has a single nonvisual arrestin, kurtz, which is found at high levels within the adult olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs), suggesting a role for this gene in modulating olfactory sensitivity. Using heat-induced expression of a krz cDNA through development, we rescued krz(1) lethality. The resulting adults lacked detectable levels of krz in the olfactory system. The rescued krz(1) homozygotes have an incompletely penetrant antennal structural defect that was completely rescued by the neural expression of a krz cDNA. The krz(1) loss-of-function adults without visible antennal defects displayed diminished behavioral responsiveness to both aversive and attractive odors and also demonstrated reduced olfactory receptor potentials. Both the behavioral and electrophysiological phenotypes were rescued by the targeted expression of the krz cDNA within postdevelopmental ORNs. Thus, krz is required within the nervous system for antennal development and is required later in the ORNs for the maintenance of olfactory sensitivity in Drosophila. The reduced receptor potentials in krz(1) antenna indicate that nonvisual arrestins are required for the early odor-induced signaling events within the ORNs.

The intrinsic circadian clock within the cardiomyocyte

Circadian clocks are intracellular molecular mechanisms that allow the cell to anticipate the time of day. We have previously reported that the intact rat heart expresses the major components of the circadian clock, of which its rhythmic expression in vivo is consistent with the operation of a fully functional clock mechanism. The present study exposes oscillations of circadian clock genes [brain and arylhydrocarbon receptor nuclear translocator-like protein 1 ( bmal1), reverse strand of the c-erbaα gene ( rev-erbaα), period 2 ( per2), albumin D-element binding protein ( dbp)] for isolated adult rat cardiomyocytes in culture. Acute (2 h) and/or chronic (continuous) treatment of cardiomyocytes with FCS (50% and 2.5%, respectively) results in rhythmic expression of circadian clock genes with periodicities of 20–24 h. In contrast, cardiomyocytes cultured in the absence of serum exhibit dramatically dampened oscillations in bmal1 and dbp only. Zeitgebers (timekeepers) are factors that influence the timing of the circadian clock. Glucose, which has been previously shown to reactivate circadian clock gene oscillations in fibroblasts, has no effect on the expression of circadian clock genes in adult rat cardiomyocytes, either in the absence or presence of serum. Exposure of adult rat cardiomyocytes to the sympathetic neurotransmitter norephinephrine (10 μM) for 2 h reinitiates rhythmic expression of circadian clock genes in a serum-independent manner. Oscillations in circadian clock genes were associated with 24-h oscillations in the metabolic genes pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase 4 ( pdk4) and uncoupling protein 3 ( ucp3). In conclusion, these data suggest that the circadian clock operates within the myocytes of the heart and that this molecular mechanism persists under standard cell culture conditions (i.e., 2.5% serum). Furthermore, our data suggest that norepinephrine, unlike glucose, influences the timing of the circadian clock within the heart and that the circadian clock may be a novel mechanism regulating myocardial metabolism.

Circadian rhythms from multiple oscillators: lessons from diverse organisms

The organization of biological activities into daily cycles is universal in organisms as diverse as cyanobacteria, fungi, algae, plants, flies, birds and man. Comparisons of circadian clocks in unicellular and multicellular organisms using molecular genetics and genomics have provided new insights into the mechanisms and complexity of clock systems. Whereas unicellular organisms require stand-alone clocks that can generate 24-hour rhythms for diverse processes, organisms with differentiated tissues can partition clock function to generate and coordinate different rhythms. In both cases, the temporal coordination of a multi-oscillator system is essential for producing robust circadian rhythms of gene expression and biological activity.

Transcription regulation within the circadian clock: the E-box and beyond

The circadian oscillator is composed of transcriptional feedback loops in organisms ranging from cyanobacteria to humans. These transcriptional feedback loops are so named because transcriptional regulators accumulate to high levels and then feed back to control their own genes' transcription, thus generating a self-sustaining rhythm in gene expression. In insects and vertebrates, the genes that encode these feedback regulators are remarkably well conserved and function to control not 1 but 2 feedback loops. These feedback loops control rhythmic transcription in opposite phases of the circadian cycle, yet they are interlocked because they share a number of components. In this review, the author will compare transcriptional regulatory mechanisms within the Drosophila and mammalian feedback loops and outline remaining questions concerning transcriptional regulation within and downstream of these feedback loops.

Simulation of Drosophila circadian oscillations, mutations, and light responses by a model with VRI, PDP-1, and CLK

A model of Drosophila circadian rhythm generation was developed to represent feedback loops based on transcriptional regulation of per, Clk (dclock), Pdp-1, and vri (vrille). The model postulates that histone acetylation kinetics make transcriptional activation a nonlinear function of [CLK]. Such a nonlinearity is essential to simulate robust circadian oscillations of transcription in our model and in previous models. Simulations suggest that two positive feedback loops involving Clk are not essential for oscillations, because oscillations of [PER] were preserved when Clk, vri, or Pdp-1 expression was fixed. However, eliminating positive feedback by fixing vri expression altered the oscillation period. Eliminating the negative feedback loop in which PER represses per expression abolished oscillations. Simulations of per or Clk null mutations, of per overexpression, and of vri, Clk, or Pdp-1 heterozygous null mutations altered model behavior in ways similar to experimental data. The model simulated a photic phase-response curve resembling experimental curves, and oscillations entrained to simulated light-dark cycles. Temperature compensation of oscillation period could be simulated if temperature elevation slowed PER nuclear entry or PER phosphorylation. The model makes experimental predictions, some of which could be tested in transgenic Drosophila.

Circadian clocks in antennal neurons are necessary and sufficient for olfaction rhythms in Drosophila

BACKGROUND

The Drosophila circadian clock is controlled by interlocked transcriptional feedback loops that operate in many neuronal and nonneuronal tissues. These clocks are roughly divided into a central clock, which resides in the brain and is known to control rhythms in locomotor activity, and peripheral clocks, which comprise all other clock tissues and are thought to control other rhythmic outputs. We previously showed that peripheral oscillators are required to mediate rhythmic olfactory responses in the antenna, but the identity and relative autonomy of these peripheral oscillators has not been defined.

RESULTS

Targeted ablation of lateral neurons by using apoptosis-promoting factors and targeted clock disruption in antennal neurons with newly developed dominant-negative versions of CLOCK and CYCLE show that antennal neurons, but not central clock cells, are necessary for olfactory rhythms. Targeted rescue of antennal neuron oscillators in cyc(01) flies through wild-type CYCLE shows that these neurons are also sufficient for olfaction rhythms.

CONCLUSIONS

Antennal neurons are both necessary and sufficient for olfaction rhythms, which demonstrates for the first time that a peripheral tissue can function as an autonomous pacemaker in Drosophila. These results reveal fundamental differences in the function and organization of circadian oscillators in Drosophila and mammals and suggest that components of the olfactory signal transduction cascade could be targets of circadian regulation.

vrille, Pdp1, and dClock form a second feedback loop in the Drosophila circadian clock

The Drosophila circadian clock consists of two interlocked transcriptional feedback loops. In one loop, dCLOCK/CYCLE activates period expression, and PERIOD protein then inhibits dCLOCK/CYCLE activity. dClock is also rhythmically transcribed, but its regulators are unknown. vrille (vri) and Par Domain Protein 1 (Pdp1) encode related transcription factors whose expression is directly activated by dCLOCK/CYCLE. We show here that VRI and PDP1 proteins feed back and directly regulate dClock expression. Repression of dClock by VRI is separated from activation by PDP1 since VRI levels peak 3-6 hours before PDP1. Rhythmic vri transcription is required for molecular rhythms, and here we show that the clock stops in a Pdp1 null mutant, identifying Pdp1 as an essential clock gene. Thus, VRI and PDP1, together with dClock itself, comprise a second feedback loop in the Drosophila clock that gives rhythmic expression of dClock, and probably of other genes, to generate accurate circadian rhythms.

VRILLE feeds back to control circadian transcription of Clock in the Drosophila circadian oscillator

The Drosophila circadian oscillator consists of interlocked period (per)/timeless (tim) and Clock (Clk) transcriptional/translational feedback loops. Within these feedback loops, CLK and CYCLE (CYC) activate per and tim transcription at the same time as they repress Clk transcription, thus controlling the opposite cycling phases of these transcripts. CLK-CYC directly bind E box elements to activate transcription, but the mechanism of CLK-CYC-dependent repression is not known. Here we show that a CLK-CYC-activated gene, vrille (vri), encodes a repressor of Clk transcription, thereby identifying vri as a key negative component of the Clk feedback loop in Drosophila's circadian oscillator. The blue light photoreceptor encoding cryptochrome (cry) gene is also a target for VRI repression, suggesting a broader role for VRI in the rhythmic repression of output genes that cycle in phase with Clk.

Central and peripheral circadian oscillators in Drosophila

Drosophila circadian oscillators comprise interlocked period (per)/timeless (tim) and Clock (Clk) transcriptional/translational feedback loops. Within these feedback loops, CLOCK (CLK) and CYCLE (CYC) bind E-box elements to activate per and tim transcription, and we now show that at the same time CLK-CYC repress Clk by activating the transcriptional repressor vrille (vri), thus accounting for the opposite cycling phases of these transcripts and identifying vri as the negative component of the Clk-feedback-loop. The core oscillator mechanism is assumed to be the same for oscillators in different tissues. However, we have shown that CRYPTOCHROME (CRY) has a light-independent function in the oscillator that controls olfaction rhythms, suggesting that CRY may function within the oscillator mechanism itself as it does in mammals. These olfaction rhythms require the function of 'peripheral' oscillators which are distinct from the 'central' lateral neuron (LN) oscillators that mediate locomotor activity rhythms. Preliminary results show that antennal oscillator cells are sufficient and LNs are not necessary for olfaction rhythms, indicating that unlike the situation in mammals, the central oscillator has little impact on the olfaction rhythm oscillator under these conditions.