Michael H. Dickinson’s research while affiliated with California Institute of Technology and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (303)


Single-cell type analysis of wing premotor circuits in the ventral nerve cord of Drosophila melanogaster
  • Preprint

May 2025

·

12 Reads

·

·

·

[...]

·

To perform most behaviors, animals must send commands from higher-order processing centers in the brain to premotor circuits that reside in ganglia distinct from the brain, such as the mammalian spinal cord or insect ventral nerve cord. How these circuits are functionally organized to generate the great diversity of animal behavior remains unclear. An important first step in unraveling the organization of premotor circuits is to identify their constituent cell types and create tools to monitor and manipulate these with high specificity to assess their functions. This is possible in the tractable ventral nerve cord of the fly. To generate such a toolkit, we used a combinatorial genetic technique (split-GAL4) to create 195 sparse transgenic driver lines targeting 196 individual cell types in the ventral nerve cord. These included wing and haltere motoneurons, modulatory neurons, and interneurons. Using a combination of behavioral, developmental, and anatomical analyses, we systematically characterized the cell types targeted in our collection. In addition, we identified correspondences between the cells in this collection and a recent connectomic data set of the ventral nerve cord. Taken together, the resources and results presented here form a powerful toolkit for future investigations of neuronal circuits and connectivity of premotor circuits while linking them to behavioral outputs.


Single-cell type analysis of wing premotor circuits in the ventral nerve cord of Drosophila melanogaster

May 2025

·

2 Reads

To perform most behaviors, animals must send commands from higher-order processing centers in the brain to premotor circuits that reside in ganglia distinct from the brain, such as the mammalian spinal cord or insect ventral nerve cord. How these circuits are functionally organized to generate the great diversity of animal behavior remains unclear. An important first step in unraveling the organization of premotor circuits is to identify their constituent cell types and create tools to monitor and manipulate these with high specificity to assess their functions. This is possible in the tractable ventral nerve cord of the fly. To generate such a toolkit, we used a combinatorial genetic technique (split-GAL4) to create 195 sparse transgenic driver lines targeting 196 individual cell types in the ventral nerve cord. These included wing and haltere motoneurons, modulatory neurons, and interneurons. Using a combination of behavioral, developmental, and anatomical analyses, we systematically characterized the cell types targeted in our collection. In addition, we identified correspondences between the cells in this collection and a recent connectomic data set of the ventral nerve cord. Taken together, the resources and results presented here form a powerful toolkit for future investigations of neuronal circuits and connectivity of premotor circuits while linking them to behavioral outputs.


Insect Flight: State of the Field and Future Directions

July 2024

·

262 Reads

·

3 Citations

Integrative and Comparative Biology

Synopsis The evolution of flight in an early winged insect ancestral lineage is recognized as a key adaptation explaining the unparalleled success and diversification of insects. Subsequent transitions and modifications to flight machinery, including secondary reductions and losses, also play a central role in shaping the impacts of insects on broadscale geographic and ecological processes and patterns in the present and future. Given the importance of insect flight, there has been a centuries-long history of research and debate on the evolutionary origins and biological mechanisms of flight. Here, we revisit this history from an interdisciplinary perspective, discussing recent discoveries regarding the developmental origins, physiology, biomechanics, and neurobiology and sensory control of flight in a diverse set of insect models. We also identify major outstanding questions yet to be addressed and provide recommendations for overcoming current methodological challenges faced when studying insect flight, which will allow the field to continue to move forward in new and exciting directions. By integrating mechanistic work into ecological and evolutionary contexts, we hope that this synthesis promotes and stimulates new interdisciplinary research efforts necessary to close the many existing gaps about the causes and consequences of insect flight evolution.


Detailed properties of individual leg and wing MNs
a, Number of input synapses on each leg MN. MNs are ordered by the muscle they innervate, from proximal coxa muscles in the thorax to distal tarsus muscles located in the tibia. b, Number of input synapses on each wing MN. Indirect MNs are shown first, direct MNs are ordered according to sclerite. c, Fraction of synapses on each leg MN broken down by cell class (see Methods). d, Fraction of synapses on each wing MN broken down by cell class. e, Number of preMNs presynaptic to each leg MN. f, Number of preMNs presynaptic to each wing MN. g, h, Fraction of presynaptic partners from each cell class. Presynaptic partners include proofread neurons only, so fragments are not included. On average, each MN receives 3,641 input synapses from 188 preMNs (using a 3-synapse threshold) and each preMN synapses onto 6 MNs (7.2 ± 7.4 sd. for leg preMNs, 5.1 ± 3.1 for wing preMNs). i, j, MN volume. k, MN volume vs. surface area for leg MNs (left) and wing MNs (right). Wing MNs tend to have thicker neurites, explaining the steeper relationship. The thick b1 wing steering MN is the outlier.
Agglomerative hierarchical clustering of leg MNs according to premotor connectivity
a, Hierarchical clustering of MNs based on the cosine similarity of the columns of the premotor connectivity matrix (Fig. 2d). The scipy.cluster AgglomerativeClustering algorithm minimizes the sum of squared distances in each cluster (Ward, scikit-learn). The algorithm identifies seven clear clusters numbered according to the proximal-to-distal origins and insertion points of the innervated muscles (right). b, Magnification of seven additional clusters at the top left of the similarity matrix. The muscle targets of MNs in each cluster are indicated below. We remain uncertain about which of four MNs innervate the tergopleural vs. the pleural promotor muscles that insert on the anterior aspect of the coxa (cluster 1a). c, In Azevedo et al.⁷, we identified the muscle targets of each MN by comparing anatomical criteria (left). We performed UMAP clustering of the density of input synapses in 3D onto each MN, as an independent, quantitative verification of our anatomical assignments (right). This analysis revealed surprising features that are corroborated by analyzing preMN connectivity here. Specifically, accessory tibia flexor MNs split into 3 distinct clusters, clusters 7, 8, and 9, where the four accessory tibia flexors in cluster 7 clustered with the five main tibia flexor MNs. Additionally, four of the six tarsus MNs clustered with the same groups, one in cluster 7, two in cluster 8, and 1 in cluster 9 (see numbers at bottom). A fifth tarsus MN, the retro depressor MN, clustered on its own (cluster 12). The final tarsus MN clustered with the small LTM MNs in cluster 10; all three are known to express dip-alpha (Venkatasubramanian et al.⁷⁵). d, Clusters based on premotor connectivity from a and b. The differences from the UMAP of synapse density include: promotor MNs of the coxa (cluster 1a) clustered separately from the adductor and rotator MNs (cluster 1b); the tarsus depressor MN (cluster 13) clustered separately from the two dip-alpha-positive LTM MNs (cluster 10); a small MN clustered in a separate cluster labeled with an asterisk (*), depicted in f. Names for each module are given on the right. e, UMAP embedding of the columns of the premotor connectivity matrix (Fig. 2d). This clustering does not rely on cosine similarity and largely corroborates the agglomerative clustering. f, Two trochanter flexor MNs with somas on the posterior cortex of the neuropil. In total, six MNs have somas on the dorsal cortex. Four of these neurons innervate the sternal posterior rotator muscle. We argued in Azevedo et al. ⁷ that the remaining two MNs innervate the trochanter flexor muscle because we observed two axons enter the proximal fibers of the muscle in the X-ray data. The larger of the two MNs (green) clustered with the trochanter flexor MNs according to both the hierarchical clustering and the UMAP embedding. The MN indicated by the asterisk (blue) receives approximately 10X fewer synapses, perhaps explaining why it either clustered by itself (b) or with the sternal rotator MNs (e). In summary, in the paper, we include the (*) MN with the Trochanter flex MNs.
Similarity of wing MNs creates separable modules through agglomerative clustering
a, Cosine similarity matrix for all wing MNs. Axes are symmetric, each row/column is an MN. (Right) The agglomerative clustering dendrogram along with the threshold at which clusters are separable. Colored branches on the dendrogram depict different modules, not muscles. b, Similarity scores for each pair of wing MNs. Indirect MNs are separated from direct and tension MNs to better show the distribution of similarity scores of direct and tension MNs. c, Schematic showing how ordering by anatomy (left) relates to agglomerative clustering by cosine similarity (right). d, UMAP does not separate the wing MNs by connectivity, possibly because their synaptic input weights are not stereotyped (or proportional) from preMNs. Data points are colored post-hoc according to the agglomerative clustering results.
Local PreMNs drive MN cosine similarity and modularity, for wing and leg systems
a, Cumulative density functions (CDFs) of module preference for individual preMNs targeting leg MNs, separated by preMN cell class. Gray indicates ten overlaid example CDFs randomly selected from shuffling the columns of each row of the connectivity matrix. Right, Total MN synapses (y-axis) vs. module preference of local preMNs. Pearson’s r for each cell class is shown, p < 10⁻¹³. PreMNs with fewer MN synapses have a slight tendency to contact a single module. b, Fraction of MN input synapses (each bar) from local preMNs that prefer that MN’s module (gray) vs. prefer a different module (white). PreMN synapses onto a preferred module account for 62.2% of synapses onto leg MNs. c, Cosine similarity matrices for leg MNs, calculated using synapses from preMNs of each cell class. Modules found in Extended Data Fig. 2 are shown at left and right. Below each matrix is a color bar indicating clusters found by performing the same agglomerative clustering algorithm on the matrix above. Only local preMN connectivity gives the same clusters as using all preMNs. d, CDFs of pairwise similarity of MNs within modules defined in Extended Data Fig. 2 (dark lines) vs. across modules (light colors). Right, the area under the curve (AUC) measures the overlap of the CDFs, with 0.5 indicating similar CDFs, and 1 indicating complete separation (see Methods). Gray bars show the improvement in the AUC if the clusters shown below the similarity matrices in c are used instead. Together, these analyses show that local neurons are responsible for the modularity of MNs. Other classes of preMNs tend to prefer a single module (a) but can make select synapses across modules. e, Module preference for individual preMNs targeting wing MNs, as in a. f, Fraction of input synapses on wing MNs from local preMNs that preferentially target each MN’s module (gray) vs a different module (white). PreMN synapses onto a preferred module account for 75.7% of synapses onto wing MNs. g, Cosine similarity matrices for indirect (power) MNs, calculated using synapses from preMNs of each cell class. Indirect muscles are divided into two antagonistic modules: dorsal longitudinal muscles (DLMs, dark green) and dorso-ventral muscles (DVMs, light green). They share common input from all cell classes except sensory axons, from which they receive few synapses. h, Pairwise similarity of indirect MNs within modules, based on connectivity of each cell class. i, Similarity matrices for tension and direct (steering) MNs. j, Pairwise similarity of indirect MNs within (dark line) vs. across (light) modules, for each preMN cell class. Colors are indicated in e.
Example leg preMNs, their synapses onto motor modules, and impact of proportional connectivity on MN similarity
a, The location of synapses (spheres) from example preMNs that preferentially synapse onto the SETi (light orange) and FETi (dark orange) tibia extensor MNs. Each preMN has a different morphology and makes more synapses onto FETi than onto SETi. b, Example preMNs that preferentially synapse onto the five tibia flexor MNs in the Tibia flex A module (different shades of blue spheres). c, A single example preMN from b, showing the locations of synapses onto four of the five tibia flexor MNs in the module. The preMN makes more synapses onto the largest neuron, with extra synapses distributed throughout the processes. d, Bootstrap shuffling of module connectivity (see Methods for details). This analysis is similar to Fig. 4h, but for only the largest neurons with the highest similarity (green squares), where high MN similarity reflects proportional preMN weights onto each MN in the module, as in a-c. e, Left, the unshuffled synapse counts from all local preMNs onto the Tibia Flex A MNs; middle, the same matrix with example shuffled synapse counts from the module-targeting preMNs; right, the resulting MN similarity matrices, highlighting the pairwise similarities in the upper triangle. f, The cumulative probability density function (cdf) of the mean pairwise MN similarity for N = 10,000 shuffling repeats, compared to the actual mean. The actual mean is larger than 99.7% of the shuffled instances. g, The bootstrap p-value for the regions of high MN similarity. The high p-values indicate pairs of neurons with small differences in their total synaptic input, such that shuffling the proportional synapses does not disrupt a large difference like exists for the FETi and SETi in a.

+7

Synaptic architecture of leg and wing premotor control networks in Drosophila
  • Article
  • Publisher preview available

June 2024

·

105 Reads

·

17 Citations

Nature

Animal movement is controlled by motor neurons (MNs), which project out of the central nervous system to activate muscles¹. MN activity is coordinated by complex premotor networks that facilitate the contribution of individual muscles to many different behaviours2–6. Here we use connectomics⁷ to analyse the wiring logic of premotor circuits controlling the Drosophila leg and wing. We find that both premotor networks cluster into modules that link MNs innervating muscles with related functions. Within most leg motor modules, the synaptic weights of each premotor neuron are proportional to the size of their target MNs, establishing a circuit basis for hierarchical MN recruitment. By contrast, wing premotor networks lack proportional synaptic connectivity, which may enable more flexible recruitment of wing steering muscles. Through comparison of the architecture of distinct motor control systems within the same animal, we identify common principles of premotor network organization and specializations that reflect the unique biomechanical constraints and evolutionary origins of leg and wing motor control.

View access options

Connectomic reconstruction of a female Drosophila ventral nerve cord

June 2024

·

108 Reads

·

36 Citations

Nature

A deep understanding of how the brain controls behaviour requires mapping neural circuits down to the muscles that they control. Here, we apply automated tools to segment neurons and identify synapses in an electron microscopy dataset of an adult female Drosophila melanogaster ventral nerve cord (VNC)¹, which functions like the vertebrate spinal cord to sense and control the body. We find that the fly VNC contains roughly 45 million synapses and 14,600 neuronal cell bodies. To interpret the output of the connectome, we mapped the muscle targets of leg and wing motor neurons using genetic driver lines² and X-ray holographic nanotomography³. With this motor neuron atlas, we identified neural circuits that coordinate leg and wing movements during take-off. We provide the reconstruction of VNC circuits, the motor neuron atlas and tools for programmatic and interactive access as resources to support experimental and theoretical studies of how the nervous system controls behaviour.



Machine learning reveals the control mechanics of an insect wing hinge

April 2024

·

179 Reads

·

20 Citations

Nature

Insects constitute the most species-rich radiation of metazoa, a success that is due to the evolution of active flight. Unlike pterosaurs, birds and bats, the wings of insects did not evolve from legs¹, but are novel structures that are attached to the body via a biomechanically complex hinge that transforms tiny, high-frequency oscillations of specialized power muscles into the sweeping back-and-forth motion of the wings². The hinge consists of a system of tiny, hardened structures called sclerites that are interconnected to one another via flexible joints and regulated by the activity of specialized control muscles. Here we imaged the activity of these muscles in a fly using a genetically encoded calcium indicator, while simultaneously tracking the three-dimensional motion of the wings with high-speed cameras. Using machine learning, we created a convolutional neural network³ that accurately predicts wing motion from the activity of the steering muscles, and an encoder–decoder⁴ that predicts the role of the individual sclerites on wing motion. By replaying patterns of wing motion on a dynamically scaled robotic fly, we quantified the effects of steering muscle activity on aerodynamic forces. A physics-based simulation incorporating our hinge model generates flight manoeuvres that are remarkably similar to those of free-flying flies. This integrative, multi-disciplinary approach reveals the mechanical control logic of the insect wing hinge, arguably among the most sophisticated and evolutionarily important skeletal structures in the natural world.



Fig. 1 | Activities of DNae014 and DNb01 correlate strongly with spontaneous saccades. a, Flight trajectory and photomontage illustrating a single saccade, adapted from (Censi et al., 2013; Muijres et al., 2014). b, Schematic of set-up for monitoring neural activity with GCaMP7f and simultaneously tracking wingstroke amplitudes during flight. c, Fly with central nervous system. d, Anatomy of right DNae014 (green) and DNb01 (magenta) cells in the brain and VNC. e, Bilateral expression patterns of DNae014 and DNb01 cells in the brain from split-GAL4 lines, showing the fields of view scanned in 2-photon experiments (dashed boxes). Black arrows indicate somata. f, Top: left (dark gray) and right (light gray) wingstroke amplitudes. Bottom: normalized GCaMP7f fluorescence (ΔF/F) in left and right DNae014 cells during a 90-second flight epoch. g, Similar to f, but for DNb01. h, Right-left difference in DNae014 signals (green) superimposed with left-right difference in wingstroke amplitudes (black). Both traces are normalized by z-score from the traces above in f. Automatically detected right and left saccades depicted as green dots above and below, respectively. i, Similar to h, but for DNb01. j, Pooled regressions for DNae014 (green) and DNb01 (magenta) of left vs. right cell activity (ΔF/F), normalized by z-score (n = 19 flies) and plotted as a kernel density estimate. k, Regressions of L-R wingstroke amplitude vs. R-L ΔF/F, across 19 flies for DNae014 (green; r 2 = 0.89±0.04, mean±sd) and DNb01 (magenta, r 2 = 0.90±0.03, mean±sd). l, Changes in DNae014 (left column) and DNb01 (right column) cell activity aligned to the onset of spontaneous flight saccades. Top traces: ΔF/F signals for right cell (light color), left cell (dark color), and right-left difference (black). Bottom traces: baseline-subtracted wingstroke amplitudes of left (dark gray), right (light gray) wings, along with left-right difference (black). Solid lines indicate mean of means for all individuals (n = 19 flies for each dataset); shaded areas indicate boot-strapped 95% CIs.
Fig. 2 | Unilateral activation of either DNae014 and DNb01 elicits directional saccades. a-c, Unilateral 2-photon excitation of either left or right DNae014 neurons. a, Approximate 2-photon excitation areas of the right and left dendritic arbors of DNae014. b, Example traces of L-R wingstroke amplitude during unilateral CsChrimson excitation on the left (top) or right (bottom) side of brain. c, L-R wing amplitudes aligned to the excitation light pulse. As in all panels, solid lines indicate the mean of all individual means, the shaded patch indicates the boot-strapped 95% CI; n = 9 flies for right stimulations, n = 7 flies for left stimulations. d-i, Unilateral activation of DNae014 or DNb01 neurons in rigidly tethered flies using split-GAL4 and SPARC expression of CsChrimson. d, Flight arena with 617 nm excitation light. e, Maximum intensity projection of TdTomato signal in examples of unilateral cell expression using SPARC with split-GAL4 drivers for DNae014 (green) and DNb01 (magenta). Nc82 staining shown in grey. f, Representative morphology of right DNae014 and DNb01 cells. g, Contralateral and ipsilateral wingstroke amplitudes (top) and contralateral-ipsilateral difference (bottom), aligned to activation pulse; n= 20 flies. h, Similar to g, but for DNb01; n = 20 flies. i, Combined data from g and h, including control flies (black traces, gray envelopes) in which neither cell expressed CsChrimson; n = 20, 20, and 19 for DNae014, DNb01, and controls, respectively.
Fig. 3 | Ablation of either DNae014 or DNb01 alters saccade dynamics. a, Riged-tether flight arena with IR backlighting to track wingstroke amplitudes. b, Transient changes in L-R wingstroke amplitude indicate fictive saccades. Example control fly (top, grey), DNae014-ablated fly (middle, green), and DNb01-ablated fly (bottom, magenta) c, Individual saccade rates in the rigid tethered arena (n = 26, 25, 36, respectively). d, Magnotether flight arena with IR backlighting to track body angle and a static visual pattern. e, Example traces with saccades apparent as rapid changes in body angle and angular velocity transients (black traces). f-j, Color codes as in b. n = 22, 23, 22 flies, respectively. f, Saccade rates in the magnotether arena, plotted as mean of individual fly means and boot-strapped 95% CI. g, Cumulative histogram of inter-saccade intervals. h, Maximum inter-saccade interval (ISImax) for each 2-minute trial. i, Relationship between peak saccade speed and saccade magnitude. Dashed line: Orthogonal-distance regression fit of a 2 nd order polynomial to pooled data of control flies. j, Peak saccade speed normalized to fit in i, plotted as mean of individual fly means and boot-strapped 95% CI. Statistical differences were assessed using Kruskal-Wallis tests with Tukey's HSD method for post-hoc comparisons (c, f, h, j; *** = p<0.001; n.s. = not significant).
Fig. 4 | VES041 neurons innervate all DNae014 and DNb01 cells, along with several of their upstream targets. a, Left saccade-generating couplet (SGC) consisting of DNae014 (green) and DNb01 (magenta) cells (from FlyWire). b, Schematized model for network generating left and right saccades. Bright colors or black indicate active neurons; pale colors or gray indicate inactive neurons. c, Connectivity of putative members of the network that regulates directed saccades (rows) to SGC neurons DNae014 and DNb01 (columns; arrow indicates direction of information flow). Our analysis identified neurons that form input synapses to both SGC cells (SGCIs), neurons that form connections between ipsilateral and contralateral SGCIs (I to C SGCIs), and a neuron that connects to all four SGC cells (VES041). Connectivity data are averaged assuming symmetrical arrangement of left and right network members. d, Morphology of the left VES041 cell in FlyWire. e, Connections of VES041 cells (blue for left; grey for right) to both SGCs and bilateral pairs of SGCIs and intermediary neuron types. Colors match representations in Extended Data Fig. 5c-j. Line thickness is proportional to log of synapse count.
Descending control and regulation of spontaneous flight turns in Drosophila

September 2023

·

93 Reads

The clumped distribution of resources in the world has influenced the pattern of foraging behavior since the origins of life, selecting for a common locomotor search motif in which straight movements through resource-poor regions alternate with zig –zag exploration in resource–rich domains. For example, flies execute rapid changes in flight heading called body saccades during local search, but suppress these turns during long–distance dispersal or when surging upwind after encountering an attractive odor plume. Here, we describe the key cellular components of a neural network in flies that generates spontaneous turns as well as a specialized neuron that inhibits the network to promote straight flight. Using 2-photon imaging, optogenetic activation, and genetic ablation, we show that only four descending neurons appear sufficient to generate the descending commands to execute flight saccades. The network is organized into two functional couplets—one for right turns and one for left—with each couplet consisting of an excitatory (DNae014) and inhibitory (DNb01) neuron that project to the flight motor neuropil within the ventral nerve cord. Using resources from recently published connectomes of the fly brain, we identified a large, unique interneuron (VES041) that forms inhibitory connections to all four saccade command neurons and created specific genetic driver lines for this cell. As suggested by its connectivity, activation of VES041 strongly suppresses saccades, suggesting that it regulates the transition between local search and long-distance dispersal. These results thus identify the critical elements of a network that not only structures the locomotor behavior of flies, but may also play a crucial role in their natural foraging ecology.


Machine learning reveals the control mechanics of an insect wing hinge

June 2023

·

59 Reads

·

4 Citations

Insects constitute the most species-rich radiation of metazoa, a success due primarily to the evolution of active flight. Unlike pterosaurs, birds, and bats, the wings of insects did not evolve from legs, but are novel structures attached to the body via a biomechanically complex hinge that transforms the tiny, high-frequency oscillations of specialized power muscles into the sweeping back-and-forth motion of the wings. Due to the minute size and morphological complexity, the basic mechanics of the hinge are poorly understood. The hinge consists of a series of tiny, hardened structures called sclerites that are interconnected to one another via flexible joints and regulated by the activity of a set of specialized steering muscles. In this study, we imaged the activity of these steering muscles in a fly using a genetically encoded calcium indicator, while simultaneously tracking the 3D motion of the wings with high-speed cameras. Using machine learning approaches, we created a convolutional neural network that accurately predicts wing motion from the activity of the steering muscles, and an autoencoder that predicts the mechanical role of the individual sclerites on wing motion. By replaying patterns of wing motion on a dynamically scaled robotic fly, we quantified the effects of steering muscle activity on the production of aerodynamic forces. A physics-based simulation that incorporates our model of the wing hinge generates flight maneuvers that are remarkably similar to those of free flying flies. This integrative, multi-disciplinary approach reveals the mechanical control logic of the insect wing hinge, arguably the most sophisticated and evolutionarily important skeletal structure in the natural world.


Citations (47)


... Paleozoic fossils and recent evo-devo studies suggest that wings originated as lateral tergal outgrowths, such as those formed in palaeodictyopteran nymphs, modi ed during postembryonic development to form functional adult wings and their serial homologs [38]. It has been proposed that those wing precursors play preadaptive roles, such as thermoregulation, surface-skimming behavior, aerial body control, and respiration [38,39]. Precursors of the novel treehopper helmets on the prothorax externally appear in early nymphs [5], following a developmental pattern similar to that of wings. ...

Reference:

Lineage-specific head development in the coffin-headed cricket Loxoblemmus equestris links concentrated insect metamorphosis with novel trait evolution
Insect Flight: State of the Field and Future Directions
  • Citing Article
  • July 2024

Integrative and Comparative Biology

... We focused our reconstruction efforts on these FeCO axons because they project to the front left neuromere of the VNC (also referred to as left T1 or T1L), the region of the Drosophila VNC with the most complete information about leg sensorimotor circuits. All of the motor neurons controlling the muscles of the front left leg and their presynaptic partners have been previously identified and reconstructed in FANC 14,27 , and prior neurophysiological recordings of FeCO axons and their downstream targets were made from the front legs 18,19,25,26,28,29 . Unfortunately, leg sensory axons are among the most difficult neurons to reconstruct in all available VNC connectome datasets, likely due to rapid degeneration that begins when the legs are dissected away from the VNC during sample preparation. ...

Synaptic architecture of leg and wing premotor control networks in Drosophila

Nature

... Here, we take advantage of two separate connectome datasets that together span the CNS of a fruit fly, the Female Adult Nerve Cord (FANC) 8,14 and the Full Adult Fly Brain (FAFB), which was reconstructed as part of FlyWire 7,15 . We use connectomic analyses of brain and VNC circuits to investigate the largest somatosensory organ in the Drosophila leg, the femoral chordotonal organ (FeCO) (Fig. 1B). ...

Connectomic reconstruction of a female Drosophila ventral nerve cord

Nature

... The fluid dynamics in these systems are highly nonlinear and complex (Sane, 2003;Ellington et al., 1996): the wing induces intricate vortex structures that determine the aerodynamic forces; during flapping the wing interacts with its own, previously generated, flow field, which introduces complex time dependencies; and, finally, flapping wings often deform due to their elasticity and interaction with the flow, which then effects back on the flow itself, and so on, resulting in a complex fluid-structure interaction (Shyy et al., 2010;Nakata & Liu, 2012;Miller & Peskin, 2009;Young et al., 2009). Therefore, the forward mapping from wing motion (cause) to the aerodynamic force (outcome) often requires either using a mechanical, scaled-up flapping-wing analog (Dickinson et al., 1999;Bayiz & Cheng, 2021b;Whitney & Wood, 2010;Ellington et al., 1996;Muijres et al., 2014;Hsu et al., 2019;Melis et al., 2024), or numerical solution of the Navier-Stokes flow equation, which is highly computationally intensive and impractical for online system control. Quasi-steady-state approximations of the aerodynamic force are available and relatively simple to invert (Dickinson et al., 1999;Sane & Dickinson, 2002;Whitney & Wood, 2010;Nakata et al., 2015), however, they might become less accurate on sub-wingbeat resolution and are, hence, typically used for evaluating wingbeat-averaged forces (Bomphrey et al., 2017;Dickinson et al., 1999;Brunton et al., 2013). ...

Machine learning reveals the control mechanics of an insect wing hinge

Nature

... We hypothesize that the population of PFNs provides a compact multisensory representation of the fly's movement through space that can be used to compute external variables such as the direction of ambient wind. To test this hypothesis, we next sought to develop a dynamic encoding model that would allow us to estimate PFN responses during real flight maneuvers, which are challenging to accurately replicate in head-fixed tethered flight because of their speed (39)(40)(41)(42). ...

Descending control and regulation of spontaneous flight turns in Drosophila
  • Citing Article
  • January 2024

Current Biology

... Advances in machine learning [10,11] have recently complemented automated behavioral analyses, and supervised [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] and unsupervised methods [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] have been introduced alongside image feature-based approaches to identify behaviors. Some methods can be applied broadly to various experiments after an annotation phase, such as DeepLab-Cut [12] while others are more specialized and apply to one animal in a specified behavioral paradigm [29,30]. Supervised techniques aim to define behaviors based on external expertise, while unsupervised ones seek to have them naturally emerge, later undergoing post-hoc validation by experts. ...

Machine learning reveals the control mechanics of an insect wing hinge
  • Citing Preprint
  • June 2023

... Addressing these issues, we used a collection of Drosophila lines using the Split-GAL4 intersectional strategy to target gene expression to small, precisely defined classes of neurons in the Drosophila ventral nervous system (VNS) [10,11]. These neuronal populations represent single-neuron types, part of developmental lineages produced by single neuronal precursor cells, and represent functional modules within the central nervous system (CNS) serving specific behavioural functions and sharing common attributes of morphology, transcriptional profiles and neurotransmitter type [12][13][14]. ...

Single-cell type analysis of wing premotor circuits in the ventral nerve cord of Drosophila melanogaster

... While complete matching of all VNC neurons across the female and male datasets is still in progress, the neurons we have matched so far (including DNs, ANs, SAs, and the leg premotor circuit, supplemental file 2) exhibit highly stereotyped morphology and connectivity across sides, neuromeres, and datasets. Until now these two datasets have only been analysed independently (Azevedo et al., 2022;Lesser et al., 2024) and MANC (H. S. J. *. Cheong et al., 2023) Dimorphism Some neurons could not be matched across male and female VNC datasets (Fig.1e, MANC DNs = 59, FANC DNs = 97, MANC ANs = 155, FANC ANs = 115). ...

Synaptic architecture of leg and wing motor control networks in Drosophila

... walking speed and direction) to the ventral nerve cord (VNC). Approximately 70 motor neurons (MNs, Azevedo et al. (2022)) control each leg. The cell bodies and dendrites of the MNs are in the VNC, and their axons innervate muscles in the leg. ...

Tools for comprehensive reconstruction and analysis of Drosophila motor circuits

... This study found that across 1000 trials, 79% of paired insect recordings showed follower reengagement, and the re-engaged feedback rule fit a PI control structure as illustrated in Fig. 8, with consistent proportional gains (Fig. 9a), variable integral gains (Fig. 9b), and negligible derivative gains (Fig. 12b). A proportional integral structure has previously been observed in Drosophila melanogaster solo flight the b 1 and b 2 wing muscles' role in stabilizing pitch motion (Whitehead et al., 2022), suggesting a muscle function specialization each muscle in flight control. The current study finds that the inflight PI construction seen in pitch stabilization may be a generalizable architecture integrated into more complex behaviors more complex more diverse behaviors, such as neighbor-relative flight control in groups. ...

Neuromuscular embodiment of feedback control elements in Drosophila flight

Science Advances