@article {69721, title = {A split-GAL4 driver line resource for Drosophila neuron types}, year = {2025}, month = {01/2025}, doi = {10.7554/elife.98405.3}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.98405.3}, author = {Meissner, Geoffrey W and Vannan, Allison and Jeter, Jennifer and Close, Kari and Depasquale, Gina M and Dorman, Zachary and Forster, Kaitlyn and Beringer, Jaye Anne and Gibney, Theresa V and Hausenfluck, Joanna H and He, Yisheng and Henderson, Kristin and Johnson, Lauren and Johnston, Rebecca M and Ihrke, Gudrun and Iyer, Nirmala and Lazarus, Rachel and Lee, Kelley and Li, Hsing-Hsi and Liaw, Hua-Peng and Melton, Brian and Miller, Scott and Motaher, Reeham and Novak, Alexandra and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Petruncio, Alyson and Price, Jacquelyn and Protopapas, Sophia and Tae, Susana and Taylor, Jennifer and Vorimo, Rebecca and Yarbrough, Brianna and Zeng, Kevin Xiankun and Zugates, Christopher T and Dionne, Heather and Angstadt, Claire and Ashley, Kelly and Cavallaro, Amanda and Dang, Tam and Gonzalez, Guillermo A and Hibbard, Karen L and Huang, Cuizhen and Kao, Jui-Chun and Laverty, Todd and Mercer, Monti and Perez, Brenda and Pitts, Scarlett and Ruiz, Danielle and Vallanadu, Viruthika and Zheng, Grace Zhiyu and Goina, Cristian and Otsuna, Hideo and Rokicki, Konrad and Svirskas, Robert R and Cheong, Han Sj and Dolan, Michael-John and Ehrhardt, Erica and Feng, Kai and El Galfi, Basel and Goldammer, Jens and Huston, Stephen J and Hu, Nan and Ito, Masayoshi and McKellar, Claire and minegishi, ryo and Namiki, Shigehiro and Nern, Aljoscha and Schretter, Catherine E and Sterne, Gabriella R and Venkatasubramanian, Lalanti and Wang, Kaiyu and Wolff, Tanya and Wu, Ming and George, Reed and Malkesman, Oz and Aso, Yoshinori and Card, Gwyneth M and Dickson, Barry J and Korff, Wyatt and Ito, Kei and Truman, James W and Zlatic, Marta and Rubin, Gerald M} } @article {68507, title = {A connectome and analysis of the adult Drosophila central brain.}, journal = {Elife}, volume = {9}, year = {2020}, month = {2020 Sep 07}, abstract = {

The neural circuits responsible for animal behavior remain largely unknown. We summarize new methods and present the circuitry of a large fraction of the brain of the fruit fly . Improved methods include new procedures to prepare, image, align, segment, find synapses in, and proofread such large data sets. We define cell types, refine computational compartments, and provide an exhaustive atlas of cell examples and types, many of them novel. We provide detailed circuits consisting of neurons and their chemical synapses for most of the central brain. We make the data public and simplify access, reducing the effort needed to answer circuit questions, and provide procedures linking the neurons defined by our analysis with genetic reagents. Biologically, we examine distributions of connection strengths, neural motifs on different scales, electrical consequences of compartmentalization, and evidence that maximizing packing density is an important criterion in the evolution of the fly{\textquoteright}s brain.

}, keywords = {Animals, Brain, Connectome, Drosophila melanogaster, Female, Male, Neurons, Synapses}, issn = {2050-084X}, doi = {10.7554/eLife.57443}, author = {Scheffer, Louis K and Xu, C Shan and Januszewski, Michal and Lu, Zhiyuan and Takemura, Shin-ya and Hayworth, Kenneth J and Huang, Gary B and Shinomiya, Kazunori and Maitlin-Shepard, Jeremy and Berg, Stuart and Clements, Jody and Hubbard, Philip M and Katz, William T and Umayam, Lowell and Zhao, Ting and Ackerman, David and Blakely, Tim and Bogovic, John and Dolafi, Tom and Kainmueller, Dagmar and Kawase, Takashi and Khairy, Khaled A and Leavitt, Laramie and Li, Peter H and Lindsey, Larry and Neubarth, Nicole and Olbris, Donald J and Otsuna, Hideo and Trautman, Eric T and Ito, Masayoshi and Bates, Alexander S and Goldammer, Jens and Wolff, Tanya and Svirskas, Robert and Schlegel, Philipp and Neace, Erika and Knecht, Christopher J and Alvarado, Chelsea X and Bailey, Dennis A and Ballinger, Samantha and Borycz, Jolanta A and Canino, Brandon S and Cheatham, Natasha and Cook, Michael and Dreher, Marisa and Duclos, Octave and Eubanks, Bryon and Fairbanks, Kelli and Finley, Samantha and Forknall, Nora and Francis, Audrey and Hopkins, Gary Patrick and Joyce, Emily M and Kim, SungJin and Kirk, Nicole A and Kovalyak, Julie and Lauchie, Shirley A and Lohff, Alanna and Maldonado, Charli and Manley, Emily A and McLin, Sari and Mooney, Caroline and Ndama, Miatta and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Okeoma, Nneoma and Ordish, Christopher and Padilla, Nicholas and Patrick, Christopher M and Paterson, Tyler and Phillips, Elliott E and Phillips, Emily M and Rampally, Neha and Ribeiro, Caitlin and Robertson, Madelaine K and Rymer, Jon Thomson and Ryan, Sean M and Sammons, Megan and Scott, Anne K and Scott, Ashley L and Shinomiya, Aya and Smith, Claire and Smith, Kelsey and Smith, Natalie L and Sobeski, Margaret A and Suleiman, Alia and Swift, Jackie and Takemura, Satoko and Talebi, Iris and Tarnogorska, Dorota and Tenshaw, Emily and Tokhi, Temour and Walsh, John J and Yang, Tansy and Horne, Jane Anne and Li, Feng and Parekh, Ruchi and Rivlin, Patricia K and Jayaraman, Vivek and Costa, Marta and Jefferis, Gregory Sxe and Ito, Kei and Saalfeld, Stephan and George, Reed and Meinertzhagen, Ian A and Rubin, Gerald M and Hess, Harald F and Jain, Viren and Plaza, Stephen M} } @article {51252, title = {Comparisons between the ON- and OFF-edge motion pathways in the brain.}, journal = {eLife}, volume = {8}, year = {2019}, month = {2019 Jan 09}, abstract = {

Understanding the circuit mechanisms behind motion detection is a long-standing question in visual neuroscience. In , recent synapse-level connectomes in the optic lobe, particularly in ON-pathway (T4) receptive-field circuits, in concert with physiological studies, suggest an increasingly intricate motion model compared with the ubiquitous Hassenstein-Reichardt model, while our knowledge of OFF-pathway (T5) has been incomplete. Here we present a conclusive and comprehensive connectome that for the first time integrates detailed connectivity information for inputs to both T4 and T5 pathways in a single EM dataset covering the entire optic lobe. With novel reconstruction methods using automated synapse prediction suited to such a large connectome, we successfully corroborate previous findings in the T4 pathway and comprehensively identify inputs and receptive fields for T5. While the two pathways are likely evolutionarily linked and indeed exhibit many similarities, we uncover interesting differences and interactions that may underlie their distinct functional properties.

}, issn = {2050-084X}, doi = {10.7554/eLife.40025}, author = {Shinomiya, Kazunori and Huang, Gary and Lu, Zhiyuan and Parag, Toufiq and Xu, C Shan and Aniceto, Roxanne and Ansari, Namra and Cheatham, Natasha and Lauchie, Shirley and Neace, Erika and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Ordish, Christopher and Peel, David and Shinomiya, Aya and Smith, Claire and Takemura, Satoko and Talebi, Iris and Rivlin, Patricia K and Nern, Aljoscha and Scheffer, Louis K and Plaza, Stephen M and Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {47152, title = {Synaptic circuits and their variations within different columns in the visual system of Drosophila.}, journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America}, volume = {112}, year = {2015}, month = {2015 Nov 3}, pages = {13711-6}, abstract = {

We reconstructed the synaptic circuits of seven columns in the second neuropil or medulla behind the fly{\textquoteright}s compound eye. These neurons embody some of the most stereotyped circuits in one of the most miniaturized of animal brains. The reconstructions allow us, for the first time to our knowledge, to study variations between circuits in the medulla{\textquoteright}s neighboring columns. This variation in the number of synapses and the types of their synaptic partners has previously been little addressed because methods that visualize multiple circuits have not resolved detailed connections, and existing connectomic studies, which can see such connections, have not so far examined multiple reconstructions of the same circuit. Here, we address the omission by comparing the circuits common to all seven columns to assess variation in their connection strengths and the resultant rates of several different and distinct types of connection error. Error rates reveal that, overall, \<1\% of contacts are not part of a consensus circuit, and we classify those contacts that supplement (E+) or are missing from it (E-). Autapses, in which the same cell is both presynaptic and postsynaptic at the same synapse, are occasionally seen; two cells in particular, Dm9 and Mi1, form >=20-fold more autapses than do other neurons. These results delimit the accuracy of developmental events that establish and normally maintain synaptic circuits with such precision, and thereby address the operation of such circuits. They also establish a precedent for error rates that will be required in the new science of connectomics.

}, issn = {1091-6490}, doi = {10.1073/pnas.1509820112}, author = {Takemura, Shin-ya and Xu, C Shan and Lu, Zhiyuan and Rivlin, Patricia K and Parag, Toufiq and Olbris, Donald J and Plaza, Stephen and Zhao, Ting and Katz, William T and Umayam, Lowell and Weaver, Charlotte and Hess, Harald F and Horne, Jane Anne and Nunez-Iglesias, Juan and Aniceto, Roxanne and Chang, Lei-Ann and Lauchie, Shirley and Nasca, Ashley and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Sigmund, Christopher and Takemura, Satoko and Tran, Julie and Langille, Carlie and Le Lacheur, Kelsey and McLin, Sari and Shinomiya, Aya and Chklovskii, Dmitri B and Meinertzhagen, Ian A and Scheffer, Louis K} } @article {45334, title = {A GAL4 driver resource for developmental and behavioral studies on the larval CNS of Drosophila.}, journal = {Cell Reports}, volume = {8}, year = {2014}, month = {2014 Aug 7}, pages = {897-908}, abstract = {

We report the larval CNS expression patterns for 6,650 GAL4 lines based on cis-regulatory regions (CRMs) from the Drosophila genome. Adult CNS expression patterns were previously reported for this collection, thereby providing a unique resource for determining the origins of adult cells. An illustrative example reveals the origin of the astrocyte-like glia of the ventral\ CNS. Besides larval neurons and glia, the larval CNS\ contains scattered lineages of immature, adult-specific\ neurons. Comparison of lineage expression within this large collection of CRMs provides insight into the codes used for designating neuronal types. The CRMs encode both dense and sparse patterns of lineage expression. There is little correlation between brain and thoracic lineages in patterns of sparse expression, but expression in the two regions is highly correlated in the dense mode. The optic lobes, by comparison, appear to use a different set of genetic instructions in their development.

}, issn = {2211-1247}, doi = {10.1016/j.celrep.2014.06.065}, author = {Li, Hsing-Hsi and Kroll, Jason R and Lennox, Sara M and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Jeter, Jennifer and Depasquale, Gina and Truman, James W} } @article {6178, title = {A visual motion detection circuit suggested by Drosophila connectomics.}, journal = {Nature}, volume = {500}, year = {2013}, month = {2013 Aug 7}, pages = {175{\textendash}81}, abstract = {

Animal behaviour arises from computations in neuronal circuits, but our understanding of these computations has been frustrated by the lack of detailed synaptic connection maps, or connectomes. For example, despite intensive investigations over half a century, the neuronal implementation of local motion detection in the insect visual system remains elusive. Here we develop a semi-automated pipeline using electron microscopy to reconstruct a connectome, containing 379 neurons and 8,637 chemical synaptic contacts, within the Drosophila optic medulla. By matching reconstructed neurons to examples from light microscopy, we assigned neurons to cell types and assembled a connectome of the repeating module of the medulla. Within this module, we identified cell types constituting a motion detection circuit, and showed that the connections onto individual motion-sensitive neurons in this circuit were consistent with their direction selectivity. Our results identify cellular targets for future functional investigations, and demonstrate that connectomes can provide key insights into neuronal computations.

}, issn = {1476-4687}, doi = {doi:10.1038/nature12450}, url = {http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v500/n7461/full/nature12450.html}, author = {Takemura, Shin-ya and Bharioke, Arjun and Lu, Zhiyuan and Nern, Aljoscha and Vitaladevuni, Shiv and Rivlin, Patricia K. and Katz, William T. and Olbris, Donald J. and Plaza, Stephen M and Winston, Philip and Zhao, Ting and Horne, Jane Anne and Fetter, Richard D and Takemura, Satoko and Blazek, Katerina and Chang, Lei-Ann and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Saunders, Mathew A. and Shapiro, Victor and Sigmund, Christopher and Rubin, Gerald M and Scheffer, Louis K and Meinertzhagen, Ian A. and Chklovskii, Dmitri B} }