ERK1/2 Signaling in the Development of Long-range Projection Neurons

193603-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Development of the central nervous system is an incredible process that relies on multiple extracellular signaling cues and complex intracellular interactions. Approximately 1500 genes are associated with neurodevelopmental disorders, many of which are linked to a specific biochemical signaling cascade

Development of the central nervous system is an incredible process that relies on multiple extracellular signaling cues and complex intracellular interactions. Approximately 1500 genes are associated with neurodevelopmental disorders, many of which are linked to a specific biochemical signaling cascade known as Extracellular-Signal Regulated Kinase (ERK1/2). Clearly defined mutations in regulators of the ERK1/2 pathway cause syndromes known as the RASopathies. Symptoms include intellectual disability, developmental delay, cranio-facial and cardiac deficits. Treatments for RASopathies are limited due to an in complete understanding of ERK1/2’s role in brain development. Individuals with Neurofibromatosis Type and Noonan Syndrome, the two most common RASopathies, exhibit aberrant functional and white matter organization in non-invasive imaging studies, however, the contributions of neuronal versus oligodendrocyte deficits to this phenotype are not fully understood. To define the cellular functions of ERK1/2 in motor circuit formation, this body of work focuses on two long-range projection neuron subtypes defined by their neurotransmitter. With genetic mouse models, pathological ERK1/2 in glutamatergic neurons reduces axonal outgrowth, resulting in deficits in activity dependent gene expression and the ability to learn a motor skill task. Restricting pathological ERK1/2 within cortical layer V recapitulates these wiring deficits but not the behavioral learning phenotype. Moreover, it is uncovered that pathological ERK1/2 results in compartmentalized expression pattern of phosphorylated ERK1/2. It is not clear whether ERK1/2 functions are similar in cholinergic neuron populations that mediate attention, memory, and motor control. Basal forebrain cholinergic neuron development relies heavily on NGF-TrKA neurotrophic signaling known to activate ERK1/2. Yet the function of ERK1/2 during cholinergic neuronal specification and differentiation is poorly understood. By selectively deleting ERK1/2 in cholinergic neurons, ERK1/2 is required for activity-dependent maturation of neuromuscular junctions in juvenile mice, but not the establishment of lower motor neuron number. Moreover, ERK1/2 is not required for specification of choline acetyltransferase expressing basal forebrain cholinergic neurons by 14 days of age. However, ERK1/2 may be necessary for BFCN maturation by adulthood. Collectively, these data indicate that glutamatergic neuron-autonomous decreases in long-range axonal outgrowth and modest effects on later stages of cholinergic neuron maintenance may be important aspects of neuropathogenesis in RASopathies.
Date Created
2024
Agent

The Development of Novel Methods for Assessing Human Olfaction Ability and the Odor Intensity of Samples

191036-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Olfactory perception is a complex and multifaceted process that involves the detection of volatile organic compounds by olfactory receptor neurons in the nasal neuroepithelium. Different odorants can elicit different perceived intensities at the same concentration, while direct intensity ratings are

Olfactory perception is a complex and multifaceted process that involves the detection of volatile organic compounds by olfactory receptor neurons in the nasal neuroepithelium. Different odorants can elicit different perceived intensities at the same concentration, while direct intensity ratings are vulnerable to framing effects and inconsistent scale usage. Odor perception is genetically determined, with each individual having a unique olfaction "footprint" and sensitivity levels. Genetic factors, age, gender, race, and environmental factors influence olfactory acuity. The olfactory system's complexity makes it challenging to create a standardized comparison system for olfactory perception tests. The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the importance of olfactory dysfunction, particularly the loss of smell and taste as common symptoms. Research has demonstrated the widespread occurrence of olfactory impairment in various populations, often stemming from post-viral origins, which is the leading cause of permanent smell loss. Utilizing quantitative ranking on a qualitative scale enhances the precision and accuracy when evaluating and drawing conclusions about odor perception and how to mitigate problems caused by external factors. Pairwise comparisons enhance the accuracy and consistency of results and provide a more intuitive way of comparing items. Such ranking techniques can lead to early detection of olfactory disorders and improved diagnostic tools. The COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on the significance of olfactory dysfunction, emphasizing the need for further research and standardized testing methods in olfactory perception.
Date Created
2023
Agent

The Effect of Active Sensing on Odor Perception and Associative Learning in Honeybees

Description
Active sensing is a sensory phenomenon in which organisms use self-generated energy to examine their surroundings. This experiment strives to better understand active sensing in honeybees, predicting that active sensing may display itself primarily through antennae movement and that preventing

Active sensing is a sensory phenomenon in which organisms use self-generated energy to examine their surroundings. This experiment strives to better understand active sensing in honeybees, predicting that active sensing may display itself primarily through antennae movement and that preventing antennae movement may result in differences in electroantennogram dose-response curves and associative learning plasticity. This will be done by examining changes in amplitude in electroantennogram response in both fixed-antenna and free-antenna bees over the course of a differential training protocol that establishes learned behavior discrimination.
Date Created
2023-05
Agent

Establishing Backward Paired Inhibitory Conditioning in Drosophila melanogaster

Description

Understanding learning in fruit flies (D. melanogaster) can lead to many important discoveries about learning in humans due to the large overlap of shared DNA and the appearance of the same diseases in both species. Fruit flies have already been

Understanding learning in fruit flies (D. melanogaster) can lead to many important discoveries about learning in humans due to the large overlap of shared DNA and the appearance of the same diseases in both species. Fruit flies have already been test subjects for many influential research experiments, some of which earned Nobel Prizes. This study seeks to investigate inhibitory conditioning in a way that differs from the traditional forward pairing inhibitory conditioning. Specifically, this experiment aims to establish inhibitory learning in fruit flies using backward association. The results show that when fruit flies are trained using backward conditioning as opposed to forward conditioning, there is a pattern of preference that differs substantially from the results showing an aversion to the associated odor in forward conditioning. When comparing the data using Two-Factor ANOVA of forward versus backward conditioning, it clearly indicates that the results are significant. Simply by altering the temporal placement of an unconditioned stimulus and a conditioned stimulus, the fruit flies learn significantly differently, switching from an aversion to the paired odor to a preference. Based on these results, fruit flies can be considered capable of inhibitory learning via backward pairing. Further research will consider whether responses become stronger after more repetitions of the training, and summation and retardation tests can be done in order to confirm that the response is, in fact, due to inhibitory conditioning and not just habituation.

Date Created
2023-05
Agent

EliseChesterForagingPoster.pdf

Description
In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these

In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops and has been shown to be detrimental to physiological processes that are key to honey bee foraging, such as digestion and learning. This study seeks to investigate how Pristine® exposure affects the amount of water, nectar, and pollen that honey bees collect. Colonies were fed either plain pollen patties or pollen patties containing 23 ppm Pristine®. Exposure to fungicide had no significant effect on corbicular pollen mass, the crop volumes of nectar or water foragers, or the proportions of foragers collecting different substances. There was a significantly higher sugar concentration in the crop of Pristine®-exposed nectar foragers (43.6%, 95% CI [38.8, 48.4]) compared to control nectar foragers (36.3%, 95% CI [31.9, 40.6]). The higher sugar concentration in the nectar of Pristine®-treated bees could indicate that the agrochemical decreases sucrose responsiveness or nutritional status in bees. Alternatively, fungicide exposure may increase the amount of sugar that bees need to make it back to the hive. Based on these results, it would appear that fungicides like Pristine® do not strongly affect the amounts of substances that honey bees collect, but it is still highly plausible that treated bees forage more slowly or with lower return rates.
Date Created
2023-05
Agent

Chester_Spring_2023.pdf

Description
In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these

In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops and has been shown to be detrimental to physiological processes that are key to honey bee foraging, such as digestion and learning. This study seeks to investigate how Pristine® exposure affects the amount of water, nectar, and pollen that honey bees collect. Colonies were fed either plain pollen patties or pollen patties containing 23 ppm Pristine®. Exposure to fungicide had no significant effect on corbicular pollen mass, the crop volumes of nectar or water foragers, or the proportions of foragers collecting different substances. There was a significantly higher sugar concentration in the crop of Pristine®-exposed nectar foragers (43.6%, 95% CI [38.8, 48.4]) compared to control nectar foragers (36.3%, 95% CI [31.9, 40.6]). The higher sugar concentration in the nectar of Pristine®-treated bees could indicate that the agrochemical decreases sucrose responsiveness or nutritional status in bees. Alternatively, fungicide exposure may increase the amount of sugar that bees need to make it back to the hive. Based on these results, it would appear that fungicides like Pristine® do not strongly affect the amounts of substances that honey bees collect, but it is still highly plausible that treated bees forage more slowly or with lower return rates.
Date Created
2023-05
Agent

Quantifying foraging trends in honey bees (Apis mellifera) consuming fungicide

Description

In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these

In the face of widespread pollinator decline, research has increasingly focused on ways that pesticides could be harming bees. Fungicides are pesticides that are used in greater volumes than insecticides, yet significantly fewer studies have investigated the effects of these agrochemicals. The fungicide Pristine® is commonly used on bee-pollinated crops and has been shown to be detrimental to physiological processes that are key to honey bee foraging, such as digestion and learning. This study seeks to investigate how Pristine® exposure affects the amount of water, nectar, and pollen that honey bees collect. Colonies were fed either plain pollen patties or pollen patties containing 23 ppm Pristine®. Exposure to fungicide had no significant effect on corbicular pollen mass, the crop volumes of nectar or water foragers, or the proportions of foragers collecting different substances. There was a significantly higher sugar concentration in the crop of Pristine®-exposed nectar foragers (43.6%, 95% CI [38.8, 48.4]) compared to control nectar foragers (36.3%, 95% CI [31.9, 40.6]). The higher sugar concentration in the nectar of Pristine®-treated bees could indicate that the agrochemical decreases sucrose responsiveness or nutritional status in bees. Alternatively, fungicide exposure may increase the amount of sugar that bees need to make it back to the hive. Based on these results, it would appear that fungicides like Pristine® do not strongly affect the amounts of substances that honey bees collect, but it is still highly plausible that treated bees forage more slowly or with lower return rates.

Date Created
2023-05
Agent