Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep consists of a dreaming state in which there is activation of the cortical and hippocampal electroencephalogram (EEG), rapid eye movements, and loss of muscle tone. Although REM sleep was discovered more than 50 years ago, the neuronal circuits responsible for switching between REM and non-REM (NREM) sleep remain poorly understood. Here we propose a brainstem flip-flop switch, consisting of mutually inhibitory REM-off and REM-on areas in the mesopontine tegmentum. Each side contains GABA (gamma-aminobutyric acid)-ergic neurons that heavily innervate the other. The REM-on area also contains two populations of glutamatergic neurons. One set projects to the basal forebrain and regulates EEG components of REM sleep, whereas the other projects to the medulla and spinal cord and regulates atonia during REM sleep. The mutually inhibitory interactions of the REM-on and REM-off areas may form a flip-flop switch that sharpens state transitions and makes them vulnerable to sudden, unwanted transitions-for example, in narcolepsy.

SUMMARYAlthough microglia are implicated in nerve injury-induced neuropathic pain, how injured sensory neurons engage microglia is unclear. Here we demonstrate that peripheral nerve injury induces de novo expression of colony-stimulating factor 1 (CSF1) in injured sensory neurons. The CSF1 is transported to the spinal cord where it targets the microglial CSF1 receptor (CSF1R). Cre-mediated sensory neuron deletion of Csf1 completely prevented nerve injury-induced mechanical hypersensitivity and reduced microglia activation and proliferation. In contrast, intrathecal injection of CSF1 induces mechanical hypersensitivity and microglial proliferation. Nerve injury also upregulated CSF1 in motoneurons, where it is required for ventral horn microglial activation and proliferation. Downstream of CSF1R, we found that the microglial membrane adapter protein DAP12 is required for both nerve injury- and intrathecal CSF1-induced upregulation of pain-related microglial genes and the ensuing pain, but not for microglia proliferation. Thus, both CSF1 and DAP12 are potential targets for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain.

It is generally acknowledged that humans display highly variable sensitivity to pain, including variable responses to identical injuries or pathologies. The possible contribution of genetic factors has, however, been largely overlooked. An emerging rodent literature documents the importance of genotype in mediating basal nociceptive sensitivity, in establishing a predisposition to neuropathic pain following neural injury, and in determining sensitivity to pharmacological agents and endogenous antinociception. One clear finding from these studies is that the effect of genotype is at least partially specific to the nociceptive assay being considered. In this report we begin to systematically describe and characterize genetic variability of nociception in a mammalian species, Mus musculus. We tested 11 readily-available inbred mouse strains (129/J, A/J, AKR/J, BALB/cJ, C3H/HeJ, C57BL/6J, C58/J, CBA/J, DBA/2J, RIIIS/J and SM/J) using 12 common measures of nociception. These included assays for thermal nociception (hot plate, Hargreaves' test, tail withdrawal), mechanical nociception (von Frey filaments), chemical nociception (abdominal constriction, carrageenan, formalin), and neuropathic pain (autotomy, Chung model peripheral nerve injury). We demonstrate the existence of clear strain differences in each assay, with 1.2 to 54-fold ranges of sensitivity. All nociceptive assays display moderate-to-high heritability (h2 = 0.30-0.76) and mediation by a limited number of apparent genetic loci. Data comparing inbred strains have considerable utility as a tool for understanding the genetics of nociception, and a particular relevance to transgenic studies.