Sequential appetite suppression by oral and visceral feedback to the brainstem.

The termination of a meal is controlled by dedicated neural circuits in the caudal brainstem. A key challenge is to understand how these circuits transform the sensory signals generated during feeding into dynamic control of behaviour. The caudal nucleus of the solitary tract (cNTS) is the first site in the brain where many meal-related signals are sensed and integrated1-4, but how the cNTS processes ingestive feedback during behaviour is unknown. Here we describe how prolactin-releasing hormone (PRLH) and GCG neurons, two principal cNTS cell types that promote non-aversive satiety, are regulated during ingestion. PRLH neurons showed sustained activation by visceral feedback when nutrients were infused into the stomach, but these sustained responses were substantially reduced during oral consumption. Instead, PRLH neurons shifted to a phasic activity pattern that was time-locked to ingestion and linked to the taste of food. Optogenetic manipulations revealed that PRLH neurons control the duration of seconds-timescale feeding bursts, revealing a mechanism by which orosensory signals feed back to restrain the pace of ingestion. By contrast, GCG neurons were activated by mechanical feedback from the gut, tracked the amount of food consumed and promoted satiety that lasted for tens of minutes. These findings reveal that sequential negative feedback signals from the mouth and gut engage distinct circuits in the caudal brainstem, which in turn control elements of feeding behaviour operating on short and long timescales.

Long-term potentiation reconstituted with an artificial TARP/PSD-95 complex.

The critical role of AMPA receptor (AMPAR) trafficking in long-term potentiation (LTP) of excitatory synaptic transmission is now well established, but the underlying molecular mechanism is still uncertain. Recent research suggests that PSD-95 captures AMPARs via an interaction with the AMPAR auxiliary subunits-transmembrane AMPAR regulatory proteins (TARPs). To determine if such interaction is a core minimal component of the AMPAR trafficking and LTP mechanism, we engineered artificial binding partners, which individually were biochemically and functionally dead but which, when expressed together, rescue binding and both basal synaptic transmission and LTP. These findings establish the TARP/PSD-95 complex as an essential interaction underlying AMPAR trafficking and LTP.