Human cryptochrome exhibits light-dependent magnetosensitivity - PubMed (original) (raw)

Human cryptochrome exhibits light-dependent magnetosensitivity

Lauren E Foley et al. Nat Commun. 2011.

Free PMC article

Abstract

Humans are not believed to have a magnetic sense, even though many animals use the Earth's magnetic field for orientation and navigation. One model of magnetosensing in animals proposes that geomagnetic fields are perceived by light-sensitive chemical reactions involving the flavoprotein cryptochrome (CRY). Here we show using a transgenic approach that human CRY2, which is heavily expressed in the retina, can function as a magnetosensor in the magnetoreception system of Drosophila and that it does so in a light-dependent manner. The results show that human CRY2 has the molecular capability to function as a light-sensitive magnetosensor and reopen an area of sensory biology that is ready for further exploration in humans.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1. Human CRY2 rescues light-dependent magnetoreception in CRY-deficient flies.

(a) A _tim-GAL4_-driven human CRY2 transgene (tim-GAL4/UAS-hCRY2) rescues magnetic responses in the CRY loss-of-function cry b mutant background. For comparison, naive and trained responses to the magnetic field are shown for wild-type Canton-S flies (left bar set; reproduced from ref. 8) and for a _tim-GAL4_-driven Drosophila cry transgene in cry b flies (tim-GAL4/UAS-dcry) (second from left bar set; reproduced from ref. 10). The UAS-hCRY/+ transgene alone (without the tim-GAL4 driver) did not result in significant magnetosentitive responses (_P_>0.05; right bar set). Bars show PI values for naive (white, dcry; or red, hCRY2) and trained (black, dcry; or green, hCRY2) groups. To test whether flies responded to the experimental magnetic field, we either used a one-sample _t_-test to compare naive PI values with zero (that is, PI value expected with no response to the magnetic field) or a Student's _t_-test to compare PI values between trained and naive groups. Numbers represent groups tested. Values are mean±s.e.m. *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001. Genotypes in parentheses: tim-GAL4/UAS-dcry (y w; tim-GAL4/UAS-mycdcry; cry b); tim-GAL4/UAS-hCRY (y w; tim-GAL4/UAS-mychCRY2; cry b); and UAS-dcry/+ (y w; UAS-mychCRY2/+; cry b). (b) Light dependence of magnetic responses rescued by human (h)CRY2 (y w; tim-GAL4/UAS-mychCRY2; _cry_b). The full-spectrum data are the same as those depicted in a. The irradiance curves for the three light conditions used are the same as those used previously. Bars show PI values for naive (red) and trained (green) groups. To test whether flies responded to the experimental magnetic field, we either used a one-sample _t_-test to compare naive PI values to zero (that is, PI value expected with no response to the magnetic field) or a Student's _t_-test to compare PI values between trained and naive groups. Numbers represent groups tested. Values are mean±s.e.m. **P<0.01, ***P<0.001.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Wiltschko W. & Wilschko R. Magnetic orientation and magnetoreception in birds and other animals. J. Comp. Physiol. A 191, 675–693 (2005). - PubMed
    1. Lohmann K. J., Lohmann C. M. F. & Putman N. F. Magnetic maps in animals: nature's GPS. J. Exp. Biol. 210, 3697–3705 (2007). - PubMed
    1. Phillips J. B., Muheim R. & Jorge P. E. A behavioral perspective on the biophysics of the light-dependent magnetic compass: a link between directional and special perception? J. Exp. Biol. 213, 3247–3255 (2010). - PubMed
    1. Ritz T., Adem S. & Schulten K. A model for photoreceptor-based magnetoreception in birds. Biophys. J. 78, 707–718 (2000). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lohmann K. J. Q&A: animal behaviour: magnetic-field perception. Nature 464, 1140–1142 (2010). - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources