Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Protein & Cell

ISSN 1674-800X

ISSN 1674-8018(Online)

CN 11-5886/Q

Postal Subscription Code 80-984

2018 Impact Factor: 7.575

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Prot Cell    2011, Vol. 2 Issue (3) : 215-222    https://doi.org/10.1007/s13238-011-1019-0      PMID: 21461680
COMMUNICATION
Proteomic and transcriptomic analysis of visual long-term memory in Drosophila melanogaster
Huoqing Jiang1,2, Qinlong Hou1,2, Zhefeng Gong1(), Li Liu1,3()
1. State Key Laboratory of Brain and Cognitive Science, Institute of Biophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China; 2. Graduate University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100039, China; 3. Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
 Download: PDF(182 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

The fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, is able to discriminate visual landmarks and form visual long-term memory in a flight simulator. Studies focused on the molecular mechanism of long-term memory have shown that memory formation requires mRNA transcription and protein synthesis. However, little is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying the visual learning paradigm. The present study demonstrated that both spaced training procedure (STP) and consecutive training procedure (CTP) would induce long-term memory at 12 hour after training, and STP caused significantly higher 12-h memory scores compared with CTP. Label-free quantification of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and microarray were utilized to analyze proteomic and transcriptomic differences between the STP and CTP groups. Proteomic analysis revealed 30 up-regulated and 27 down-regulated proteins; Transcriptomic analysis revealed 145 up-regulated and 129 down-regulated genes. Among them, five candidate genes were verified by quantitative PCR, which revealed results similar to microarray. These results provide insight into the molecular components influencing visual long-term memory and facilitate further studies on the roles of identified genes in memory formation.
Keywords visual learning and memory      Drosophila      long-term memory      microarray      liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry     
Corresponding Author(s): Gong Zhefeng,Email:zfgong@moon.ibp.ac.cn (Z. Gong); Liu Li,Email:liuli@sun5.ibp.ac.cn (L. Liu)   
Issue Date: 01 March 2011
 Cite this article:   
Huoqing Jiang,Qinlong Hou,Zhefeng Gong, et al. Proteomic and transcriptomic analysis of visual long-term memory in Drosophila melanogaster[J]. Prot Cell, 2011, 2(3): 215-222.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/pac/EN/10.1007/s13238-011-1019-0
https://academic.hep.com.cn/pac/EN/Y2011/V2/I3/215
Fig.1  The schematic diagram of spaced training procedure (STP; A), consecutive training procedure (CTP; B), and behavioral test procedure (C).
Fig.1  The schematic diagram of spaced training procedure (STP; A), consecutive training procedure (CTP; B), and behavioral test procedure (C).
Fig.2  STP and CTP induced similar learning performances and immediate memory performances, but different 12-h memory performances.
(A) learning performances of 12-h STP group ( = 10) and 12-h CTP group ( = 10) in the first, second, third, and last training cycles, calculated by averaging PIs of three 2-min training periods. The more training time was applied, the higher PI was achieved. In both STP and CTP groups, PIs of the first training cycle were significantly less than those of the 2nd, 3rd, and last training cycles (STP group: = 3.267, <0.01 between the first and 2nd 6-min training cycles; = 5.597, <0.001 between the first and 3rd; = 5.107, <0.001 between the first and last. CTP group: = 2.833, <0.05 between the first and 2nd; = 4.025, <0.001 between the first and 3rd; = 5.31, <0.001 between first and last), and PIs of the second training cycle were also significantly less than those of the last (STP group: = 2.738, <0.05; CTP group: = 2.433, <0.05). Moreover, PIs of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and last training cycles showed no significant difference between the STP and CTP groups. (B) Although both STP and CTP groups showed significantly higher 0-h memory scores compared with zero (STP group: = 33.42, <0.001; CTP group: = 24.19, <0.001), 0-h memory scores were not significantly different between the STP and CTP groups ( = 1.401, >0.05). The same as remind-training in 12 hours after training, PIs of the STP group were not significantly different from the CTP group ( = 0.519, >0.05). However, 12-h memory scores of both groups were significantly higher than zero (STP: = 12.14, <0.001; CTP: = 16.34, <0.001), and the 12-h memory scores following STP training were significantly greater than that after CTP training ( = 4.68, <0.001). The control group ( = 10) in which flies flew in flight simulators for two 24 min sessions and one 15 min interval in between without any training showed no 12-h memory (-0.022±0.035, = 0.62461, = 0.5477 compared to zero), although the PI of remind-training was significantly higher than zero (0.293±0.036, = 8.10, <0.001).
Fig.2  STP and CTP induced similar learning performances and immediate memory performances, but different 12-h memory performances.
(A) learning performances of 12-h STP group ( = 10) and 12-h CTP group ( = 10) in the first, second, third, and last training cycles, calculated by averaging PIs of three 2-min training periods. The more training time was applied, the higher PI was achieved. In both STP and CTP groups, PIs of the first training cycle were significantly less than those of the 2nd, 3rd, and last training cycles (STP group: = 3.267, <0.01 between the first and 2nd 6-min training cycles; = 5.597, <0.001 between the first and 3rd; = 5.107, <0.001 between the first and last. CTP group: = 2.833, <0.05 between the first and 2nd; = 4.025, <0.001 between the first and 3rd; = 5.31, <0.001 between first and last), and PIs of the second training cycle were also significantly less than those of the last (STP group: = 2.738, <0.05; CTP group: = 2.433, <0.05). Moreover, PIs of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and last training cycles showed no significant difference between the STP and CTP groups. (B) Although both STP and CTP groups showed significantly higher 0-h memory scores compared with zero (STP group: = 33.42, <0.001; CTP group: = 24.19, <0.001), 0-h memory scores were not significantly different between the STP and CTP groups ( = 1.401, >0.05). The same as remind-training in 12 hours after training, PIs of the STP group were not significantly different from the CTP group ( = 0.519, >0.05). However, 12-h memory scores of both groups were significantly higher than zero (STP: = 12.14, <0.001; CTP: = 16.34, <0.001), and the 12-h memory scores following STP training were significantly greater than that after CTP training ( = 4.68, <0.001). The control group ( = 10) in which flies flew in flight simulators for two 24 min sessions and one 15 min interval in between without any training showed no 12-h memory (-0.022±0.035, = 0.62461, = 0.5477 compared to zero), although the PI of remind-training was significantly higher than zero (0.293±0.036, = 8.10, <0.001).
Fig.3  Expressional profile of five genes were consistent in microarray and qPCR.
(A) The gene expression ratios of 12-h STP group to the 12-h CTP group for five genes from microarray analysis are shown. (B) The relative expression levels of the five genes in the 12-h CTP group and 12-h STP group from qPCR experiments. Results of qPCR were expressed as mean±SE, = 5 for each group.
Fig.3  Expressional profile of five genes were consistent in microarray and qPCR.
(A) The gene expression ratios of 12-h STP group to the 12-h CTP group for five genes from microarray analysis are shown. (B) The relative expression levels of the five genes in the 12-h CTP group and 12-h STP group from qPCR experiments. Results of qPCR were expressed as mean±SE, = 5 for each group.
1 Aberle, H., Haghighi, A.P., Fetter, R.D., McCabe, B.D., Magalh?es, T.R., and Goodman, C.S. (2002). wishful thinking encodes a BMP type II receptor that regulates synaptic growth in Drosophila. Neuron 33, 545–558 .
pmid:11856529
2 Alberini, C.M. (2009). Transcription factors in long-term memory and synaptic plasticity. Physiol Rev 89, 121–145 .
pmid:19126756
3 Boquet, I., Boujemaa, R., Carlier, M.F., and Préat, T. (2000). Ciboulot regulates actin assembly during Drosophila brain metamorphosis. Cell 102, 797–808 .
pmid:11030623
4 Bradford, M.M. (1976). A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72, 248–254 .
pmid:942051
5 Comas, D., Petit, F., and Preat, T. (2004). Drosophila long-term memory formation involves regulation of cathepsin activity. Nature 430, 460–463 .
pmid:15269770
6 Costa-Mattioli, M., and Sonenberg, N. (2006). Translational control of long-term synaptic plasticity and memory storage by eIF2alpha. Crit Rev Neurobiol 18, 187–195 .
pmid:17725521
7 Davis, H.P., and Squire, L.R. (1984). Protein synthesis and memory: a review. Psychol Bull 96, 518–559 .
pmid:6096908
8 DeZazzo, J., and Tully, T. (1995). Dissection of memory formation: from behavioral pharmacology to molecular genetics. Trends Neurosci 18, 212–218 .
pmid:7610491
9 Dubnau, J., Chiang, A.S., Grady, L., Barditch, J., Gossweiler, S., McNeil, J., Smith, P., Buldoc, F., Scott, R., Certa, U., (2003). The staufen/pumilio pathway is involved in Drosophila long-term memory. Curr Biol 13, 286–296 .
pmid:12593794
10 Ge, X., Hannan, F., Xie, Z., Feng, C., Tully, T., Zhou, H., Xie, Z., and Zhong, Y. (2004). Notch signaling in Drosophila long-term memory formation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101, 10172–10176 .
pmid:15220476
11 Gong, Z., Xia, S., Liu, L., Feng, C., and Guo, A. (1998). Operant visual learning and memory in Drosophila mutants dunce, amnesiac and radish. J Insect Physiol 44, 1149–1158 .
pmid:12770314
12 Guo, A., Li, L., Xia, S.Z., Feng, C.H., Wolf, R., and Heisenberg, M. (1996). Conditioned visual flight orientation in Drosophila: dependence on age, practice, and diet. Learn Mem 3, 49–59 .
pmid:10456076
13 Hawkins, R.D., Kandel, E.R., and Bailey, C.H. (2006). Molecular mechanisms of memory storage in Aplysia. Biol Bull 210, 174–191 .
pmid:16801493
14 Heisenberg, M., and Wolf, R. (1984). Vision in Drosophila: genetics of microbehavior. Berlin; New York: Springer-Verlag.
15 Ho, I.S., Hannan, F., Guo, H.F., Hakker, I., and Zhong, Y. (2007). Distinct functional domains of neurofibromatosis type 1 regulate immediate versus long-term memory formation. J Neurosci 27, 6852–6857 .
pmid:17581973
16 Keene, A.C., and Waddell, S. (2007). Drosophila olfactory memory: single genes to complex neural circuits. Nat Rev Neurosci 8, 341–354 .
pmid:17453015
17 Kelly, A., Laroche, S., and Davis, S. (2003). Activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase/extracellular signal-regulated kinase in hippocampal circuitry is required for consolidation and reconsolidation of recognition memory. J Neurosci 23, 5354–5360 .
pmid:12832561
18 Keshishian, H., and Kim, Y.S. (2004). Orchestrating development and function: retrograde BMP signaling in the Drosophila nervous system. Trends Neurosci 27, 143–147 .
pmid:15036879
19 Liu, G., Seiler, H., Wen, A., Zars, T., Ito, K., Wolf, R., Heisenberg, M., and Liu, L. (2006). Distinct memory traces for two visual features in the Drosophila brain. Nature 439, 551–556 .
pmid:16452971
20 Lu, Y., Lu, Y.S., Shuai, Y., Feng, C., Tully, T., Xie, Z., Zhong, Y., and Zhou, H.M. (2007). The AKAP Yu is required for olfactory long-term memory formation in Drosophila. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104, 13792–13797 .
pmid:17690248
21 Margulies, C., Tully, T., and Dubnau, J. (2005). Deconstructing memory in Drosophila. Curr Biol 15, R700–R713 .
pmid:16139203
22 Matsuno, M., Horiuchi, J., Tully, T., and Saitoe, M. (2009). The Drosophila cell adhesion molecule klingon is required for long-term memory formation and is regulated by Notch. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106, 310–315 .
pmid:19104051
23 Mayford, M., and Kandel, E.R. (1999). Genetic approaches to memory storage. Trends Genet 15, 463–470 .
pmid:10529810
24 Mazzucchelli, C., Vantaggiato, C., Ciamei, A., Fasano, S., Pakhotin, P., Krezel, W., Welzl, H., Wolfer, D.P., Pagès, G., Valverde, O., (2002). Knockout of ERK1 MAP kinase enhances synaptic plasticity in the striatum and facilitates striatal-mediated learning and memory. Neuron 34, 807–820 .
pmid:12062026
25 Park, E.M., and Cho, S. (2006). Enhanced ERK dependent CREB activation reduces apoptosis in staurosporine-treated human neuroblastoma SK-N-BE(2)C cells. Neurosci Lett 402, 190–194 .
pmid:16678346
26 Presente, A., Boyles, R.S., Serway, C.N., de Belle, J.S., and Andres, A.J. (2004). Notch is required for long-term memory in Drosophila. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101, 1764–1768 .
pmid:14752200
27 Rosenzweig, M.R., Bennett, E.L., Colombo, P.J., Lee, D.W., and Serrano, P.A. (1993). Short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term memories. Behav Brain Res 57, 193–198 .
pmid:8117424
28 Sharma, S.K., and Carew, T.J. (2004). The roles of MAPK cascades in synaptic plasticity and memory in Aplysia: facilitatory effects and inhibitory constraints. Learn Mem 11, 373–378 .
pmid:15286179
29 Stoscheck, C.M. (1990). Quantitation of protein. Methods Enzymol 182, 50–68 .
pmid:2314256
30 Walton, M.R., and Dragunow, I. (2000). Is CREB a key to neuronal survival? Trends Neurosci 23, 48–53 .
pmid:10652539
31 Wang, Z., Edwards, J.G., Riley, N., Provance, D.W. Jr, Karcher, R., Li, X.D., Davison, I.G., Ikebe, M., Mercer, J.A., Kauer, J.A., (2008b). Myosin Vb mobilizes recycling endosomes and AMPA receptors for postsynaptic plasticity. Cell 135, 535–548 .
pmid:18984164
32 Wang, Z., Pan, Y., Li, W., Jiang, H., Chatzimanolis, L., Chang, J., Gong, Z., and Liu, L. (2008a). Visual pattern memory requires foraging function in the central complex of Drosophila. Learn Mem 15, 133–142 .
pmid:18310460
33 Wolf, R., and Heisenberg, M. (1991). Basic organization of operant behavior as revealed in Drosophila flight orientation. J Comp Physiol A 169, 699–705 .
pmid:1795235
34 Wu, C.L., Xia, S., Fu, T.F., Wang, H., Chen, Y.H., Leong, D., Chiang, A.S., and Tully, T. (2007). Specific requirement of NMDA receptors for long-term memory consolidation in Drosophila ellipsoid body. Nat Neurosci 10, 1578–1586 .
pmid:17982450
35 Xia, S., Liu, L., Feng, C., and Guo, A. (1997). Memory consolidation in Drosophila operant visual learning. Learn Mem 4, 205–218 .
pmid:10456064
36 Xia, S., Miyashita, T., Fu, T.F., Lin, W.Y., Wu, C.L., Pyzocha, L., Lin, I.R., Saitoe, M., Tully, T., and Chiang, A.S. (2005). NMDA receptors mediate olfactory learning and memory in Drosophila. Curr Biol 15, 603–615 .
pmid:15823532
37 Xia, S.Z., Feng, C.H., and Guo, A.K. (1998). Multiple-phase model of memory consolidation confirmed by behavioral and pharmacological analyses of operant conditioning in Drosophila. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 60, 809–816 .
pmid:9700962
38 Yin, J.C., Wallach, J.S., Wilder, E.L., Klingensmith, J., Dang, D., Perrimon, N., Zhou, H., Tully, T., and Quinn, W.G. (1995). A Drosophila CREB/CREM homolog encodes multiple isoforms, including a cyclic AMP-dependent protein kinase-responsive transcriptional activator and antagonist. Mol Cell Biol 15, 5123–5130 .
pmid:7651429
39 Zhao, H., Zheng, X., Yuan, X., Wang, L., Wang, X., Zhong, Y., Xie, Z., and Tully, T. (2009). ben Functions with scamp during synaptic transmission and long-term memory formation in Drosophila. J Neurosci 29, 414–424 .
pmid:19144841
[1] Ying Gu,Guang-Hui Liu,Nongluk Plongthongkum,Christopher Benner,Fei Yi,Jing Qu,Keiichiro Suzuki,Jiping Yang,Weiqi Zhang,Mo Li,Nuria Montserrat,Isaac Crespo,Antonio del Sol,Concepcion Rodriguez Esteban,Kun Zhang,Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte. Global DNA methylation and transcriptional analyses of human ESC-derived cardiomyocytes[J]. Protein Cell, 2014, 5(1): 59-68.
[2] Zhao Zhang, Chenyu Pan, Yun Zhao. Hedgehog in the Drosophila testis niche: what does it do there?[J]. Prot Cell, 2013, 4(9): 650-655.
[3] Yu Niu, Gang Jin. Protein microarray biosensors based on imaging ellipsometry techniques and their applications[J]. Prot Cell, 2011, 2(6): 445-455.
[4] Gabriel M. Gordon, Wei Du. Conserved RB functions in development and tumor suppression[J]. Prot Cell, 2011, 2(11): 864-878.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed