4.7 Article

Pan-Neuronal Knockdown of Calcineurin Reduces Sleep in the Fruit Fly, Drosophila melanogaster

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 31, 期 37, 页码 13137-13146

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5860-10.2011

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Science, Sports and Technology, Japan [15300108, 17300105]
  2. Global Center of Excellence
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Germany-Japan Collaboration Initiative)
  4. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  5. Deutscher Akademischer Austausch Dienst
  6. Japanese Society for Promotion of Science
  7. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22300132, 15300108, 22700433, 17300105] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sleep is a unique physiological state, which is behaviorally defined, and is broadly conserved across species from mammals to invertebrates such as insects. Because of the experimental accessibility provided by various novel animal models including the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, there have been significant advances in the understanding of sleep. Although the physiological functions of sleep have not been fully elucidated, accumulating evidence indicates that sleep is necessary to maintain the plasticity of neuronal circuits and, hence, is essential in learning and memory. Calcineurin (Cn) is a heterodimeric phosphatase composed of CnA and CnB subunits and known to function in memory consolidation in the mammalian brain, but its neurological functions in the fruit fly are largely unknown. Here, we show that Cn is an important regulator of sleep in Drosophila. A pan-neuronal RNA interference-mediated knockdown of Cn expression resulted in sleep loss, whereas misexpression of the constitutively active form of a CnA protein led to increased sleep. Furthermore, CnA knockdown also impaired the retention of aversive olfactory memory. These results indicate a role for Cn and calcium-dependent signal transduction in sleep and memory regulation and may bring insight into the relationship between them.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据