Individual components of the SWI/SNF chromatin remodelling complex have distinct roles in memory neurons of the<i>Drosophila</i>mushroom body
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Technology has led to rapid progress in the identification of genes involved in neurodevelopmental disorders such as intellectual disability (ID), but our functional understanding of the causative genes is lagging. Here, we show that the SWI/SNF chromatin remodelling complex is one of the most over-represented cellular components disrupted in ID. We investigated the role of individual subunits of this large protein complex using targeted RNA interference in post-mitotic memory-forming neurons of the Drosophila mushroom body (MB). Knockdown flies were tested for defects in MB morphology, short-term memory and long-term memory. Using this approach, we identified distinct roles for individual subunits of the Drosophila SWI/SNF complex. Bap60, Snr1 and E(y)3 are required for pruning of the MBγ neurons during pupal morphogenesis, while Brm and Osa are required for survival of MBγ axons during ageing. We used the courtship conditioning assay to test the effect of MB-specific SWI/SNF knockdown on short- and long-term memory. Several subunits, including Brm, Bap60, Snr1 and E(y)3, were required in the MB for both short- and long-term memory. In contrast, Osa knockdown only reduced long-term memory. Our results suggest that individual components of the SWI/SNF complex have different roles in the regulation of structural plasticity, survival and functionality of post-mitotic MB neurons. This study highlights the many possible processes that might be disrupted in SWI/SNF-related ID disorders. Our broad phenotypic characterization provides a starting point for understanding SWI/SNF-mediated gene regulatory mechanisms that are important for development and function of post-mitotic neurons.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".