4.8 Article

Drosophila TRPA1 channel mediates chemical avoidance in gustatory receptor neurons

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1001425107

关键词

transient receptor potential; chemosensation; taste; phospholipase C; aristolochic acid

资金

  1. Korea Research Foundation [2006-352-C00065]
  2. National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders [DC007864]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2006-352-C00065] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mammalian sweet, bitter, and umami taste is mediated by a single transduction pathway that includes a phospholipase C (PLC)beta and one cation channel, TRPM5. However, in insects such as the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, it is unclear whether different tast-ants, such as bitter compounds, are sensed in gustatory receptor neurons (GRNs) through one or multiple ion channels, as the cation channels required in insect GRNs are unknown. Here, we set out to explore additional sensory roles for the Drosophila TRPA1 channel, which was known to function in thermosensation. We found that TRPA1 was expressed in GRNs that respond to aversive compounds. Elimination of TRPA1 had no impact on the responses to nearly all bitter compounds tested, including caffeine, quinine, and strychnine. Rather, we found that TRPA1 was required in a subset of avoidance GRNs for the behavioral and electrophysiological responses to aristolochic acid. TRPA1 did not appear to be activated or inhibited directly by aristolochic acid. We found that elimination of the same PLC that leads to activation of TRPA1 in thermosensory neurons was also required in the TRPA1-expressing GRNs for avoiding aristolochic acid. Given that mammalian TRPA1 is required for responding to noxious chemicals, many of which cause pain and injury, our analysis underscores the evolutionarily conserved role for TRPA1 channels in chemical avoidance.

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

4.8
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