Control and recalibration of path integration in place cells using optic flow.


Journal

Nature neuroscience
ISSN: 1546-1726
Titre abrégé: Nat Neurosci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9809671

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 Jun 2024
Historique:
received: 28 06 2022
accepted: 13 05 2024
medline: 28 6 2024
pubmed: 28 6 2024
entrez: 27 6 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Hippocampal place cells are influenced by both self-motion (idiothetic) signals and external sensory landmarks as an animal navigates its environment. To continuously update a position signal on an internal 'cognitive map', the hippocampal system integrates self-motion signals over time, a process that relies on a finely calibrated path integration gain that relates movement in physical space to movement on the cognitive map. It is unclear whether idiothetic cues alone, such as optic flow, exert sufficient influence on the cognitive map to enable recalibration of path integration, or if polarizing position information provided by landmarks is essential for this recalibration. Here, we demonstrate both recalibration of path integration gain and systematic control of place fields by pure optic flow information in freely moving rats. These findings demonstrate that the brain continuously rebalances the influence of conflicting idiothetic cues to fine-tune the neural dynamics of path integration, and that this recalibration process does not require a top-down, unambiguous position signal from landmarks.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38937582
doi: 10.1038/s41593-024-01681-9
pii: 10.1038/s41593-024-01681-9
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health (NIH)
ID : R01NS102537
Organisme : U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health (NIH)
ID : R01NS102537
Organisme : United States Department of Defense | United States Army | U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command | Army Research Office (ARO)
ID : W911NF1810327
Organisme : United States Department of Defense | United States Army | U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command | Army Research Office (ARO)
ID : W911NF1810327
Organisme : Johns Hopkins University (Johns Hopkins)
ID : Discovery
Organisme : Johns Hopkins University (Johns Hopkins)
ID : Discovery
Organisme : U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | Office of Extramural Research, National Institutes of Health (OER)
ID : R01NS102537

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.

Références

Etienne, A. S. & Jeffery, K. J. Path integration in mammals. Hippocampus 14, 180–192 (2004).
pubmed: 15098724 doi: 10.1002/hipo.10173
McNaughton, B. L. et al. Deciphering the hippocampal polyglot: the hippocampus as a path integration system. J. Exp. Biol. 199, 173–185 (1996).
pubmed: 8576689 doi: 10.1242/jeb.199.1.173
O’Keefe, J. & Conway, D. H. Hippocampal place units in the freely moving rat: why they fire where they fire. Exp. Brain Res. 31, 573–590 (1978).
pubmed: 658182
Knierim, J. J., Kudrimoti, H. S. & McNaughton, B. L. Place cells, head direction cells, and the learning of landmark stability. J. Neurosci. 15, 1648–1659 (1995).
pubmed: 7891125 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.15-03-01648.1995
Knierim, J. J., Kudrimoti, H. S. & McNaughton, B. L. Interactions between idiothetic cues and external landmarks in the control of place cells and head direction cells. J. Neurophysiol. 80, 425–446 (1998).
pubmed: 9658061 doi: 10.1152/jn.1998.80.1.425
Jayakumar, R. P. et al. Recalibration of path integration in hippocampal place cells. Nature 566, 533–537 (2019).
pubmed: 30742074 doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-0939-3
Chen, G., King, J. A., Burgess, N. & O’Keefe, J. How vision and movement combine in the hippocampal place code. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 378–383 (2013).
pubmed: 23256159 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1215834110
Terrazas, A. et al. Self-motion and the hippocampal spatial metric. J. Neurosci. 25, 8085–8096 (2005).
pubmed: 16135766 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0693-05.2005
Moser, E. I., Moser, M.-B. & McNaughton, B. L. Spatial representation in the hippocampal formation: a history. Nat. Neurosci. 20, 1448–1464 (2017).
pubmed: 29073644 doi: 10.1038/nn.4653
Muller, R. U. & Kubie, J. L. The effects of changes in the environment on the spatial firing of hippocampal complex-spike cells. J. Neurosci. 7, 1951–1968 (1987).
pubmed: 3612226 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.07-07-01951.1987
Knierim, J. J. & Hamilton, D. A. Framing spatial cognition: neural representations of proximal and distal frames of reference and their roles in navigation. Physiol. Rev. 91, 1245–1279 (2011).
pubmed: 22013211 doi: 10.1152/physrev.00021.2010
Acharya, L., Aghajan, Z. M., Vuong, C., Moore, J. J. & Mehta, M. R. Causal influence of visual cues on hippocampal directional selectivity. Cell 164, 197–207 (2016).
pubmed: 26709045 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.12.015
Purandare, C. S. et al. Moving bar of light evokes vectorial spatial selectivity in the immobile rat hippocampus. Nature 602, 461–467 (2022).
pubmed: 35140401 doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04404-x
McNaughton, B. L., Battaglia, F. P., Jensen, O., Moser, E. I. & Moser, M. B. Path integration and the neural basis of the ‘cognitive map’. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 7, 663–678 (2006).
pubmed: 16858394 doi: 10.1038/nrn1932
Savelli, F. & Knierim, J. J. Origin and role of path integration in the cognitive representations of the hippocampus: computational insights into open questions. J. Exp. Biol. 222, jeb188912 (2019).
pubmed: 30728236 doi: 10.1242/jeb.188912
Zhang, S., Schönfeld, F., Wiskott, L. & Manahan-Vaughan, D. Spatial representations of place cells in darkness are supported by path integration and border information. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 8, 222 (2014).
pubmed: 25009477 doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00222
Madhav, M. S. & Cowan, N. J. The synergy between neuroscience and control theory: the nervous system as inspiration for hard control challenges. Annu. Rev. Control Robot. Auton. Syst. 3, 243–267 (2020).
doi: 10.1146/annurev-control-060117-104856
Cowan, N. J. et al. Feedback control as a framework for understanding tradeoffs in biology. Integr. Comp. Biol. 54, 223–237 (2014).
pubmed: 24893678 doi: 10.1093/icb/icu050
Marken, R. S. & Mansell, W. Perceptual control as a unifying concept in psychology. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 17, 190–195 (2013).
doi: 10.1037/a0032933
Robinson, D. A. The use of control systems analysis in the neurophysiology of eye movements. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 4, 463–503 (1981).
pubmed: 7013640 doi: 10.1146/annurev.ne.04.030181.002335
McNamee, D. & Wolpert, D. M. Internal models in biological control. Annu. Rev. Control Robot. Auton. Syst. 2, 339–364 (2019).
pubmed: 31106294 pmcid: 6520231 doi: 10.1146/annurev-control-060117-105206
Wiener, N. Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine (MIT, 2019).
Huxley, A. From overshoot to voltage clamp. Trends Neurosci. 25, 553–558 (2002).
pubmed: 12392929 doi: 10.1016/S0166-2236(02)02280-4
Peixoto, D. et al. Decoding and perturbing decision states in real time. Nature 591, 604–609 (2021).
pubmed: 33473215 doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-03181-9
Wright, J., Macefield, V. G., Schaik, Avan. & Tapson, J. C. A review of control strategies in closed-loop neuroprosthetic systems. Front. Neurosci. 10, 312 (2016).
pubmed: 27462202 doi: 10.3389/fnins.2016.00312
O’Doherty, J. E. et al. Active tactile exploration using a brain-machine-brain interface. Nature 479, 228–231 (2011).
pubmed: 21976021 doi: 10.1038/nature10489
Ruffini, G. Conscious brain-to-brain communication using noninvasive technologies. in Closed Loop Neuroscience (El Hady, A. ed) 241–256 (Academic Press, 2016).
Roth, E., Sponberg, S. & Cowan, N. J. A comparative approach to closed-loop computation. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 25, 54–62 (2014).
pubmed: 24709601 doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2013.11.005
Mohler, B. J. et al. Calibration of locomotion resulting from visual motion in a treadmill-based virtual environment. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 4, 4-es (2007).
doi: 10.1145/1227134.1227138
Tcheang, L., Bülthoff, H. H. & Burgess, N. Visual influence on path integration in darkness indicates a multimodal representation of large-scale space. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 1152–1157 (2011).
pubmed: 21199934 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1011843108
Rieser, J. J., Pick, H. L., Ashmead, D. H. & Garing, A. E. Calibration of human locomotion and models of perceptual-motor organization. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 21, 480–497 (1995).
pubmed: 7790829 doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.21.3.480
Madhav, M. S. et al. The Dome: a virtual reality apparatus for freely locomoting rodents. J. Neurosci. Methods 368, 109336 (2022).
pubmed: 34453979 doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2021.109336
Kautzky, M. & Thurley, K. Estimation of self-motion duration and distance in rodents. R. Soc. Open Sci. 3, 160118 (2016).
pubmed: 27293792 doi: 10.1098/rsos.160118
O’Connor, S. M. & Donelan, J. M. Fast visual prediction and slow optimization of preferred walking speed. J. Neurophysiol. 107, 2549–2559 (2012).
pubmed: 22298829 doi: 10.1152/jn.00866.2011
Warren, W. H., Kay, B. A., Zosh, W. D., Duchon, A. P. & Sahuc, S. Optic flow is used to control human walking. Nat. Neurosci. 4, 213–216 (2001).
pubmed: 11175884 doi: 10.1038/84054
Bruggeman, H., Zosh, W. & Warren, W. H. Optic flow drives human visuo-locomotor adaptation. Curr. Biol. 17, 2035–2040 (2007).
pubmed: 18023350 doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2007.10.059
Srinivasan, M. V., Zhang, S. W., Lehrer, M. & Collett, T. S. Honeybee navigation en route to the goal: visual flight control and odometry. J. Exp. Biol. 199, 237–244 (1996).
pubmed: 9317712 doi: 10.1242/jeb.199.1.237
Pfeffer, S. E. & Wittlinger, M. Optic flow odometry operates independently of stride integration in carried ants. Science 353, 1155–1157 (2016).
pubmed: 27609893 doi: 10.1126/science.aaf9754
Webb, B. & Wystrach, A. Neural mechanisms of insect navigation. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 15, 27–39 (2016).
pubmed: 27436729 doi: 10.1016/j.cois.2016.02.011
Biswas, D. et al. Closed-loop control of active sensing movements regulates sensory slip. Curr. Biol. 28, 4029–4036.e4 (2018).
pubmed: 30503617 doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2018.11.002
Smyth, G., Baliga, V. B., Gaede, A. H., Wylie, D. R. & Altshuler, D. L. Specializations in optic flow encoding in the pretectum of hummingbirds and zebra finches. Curr. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2022.04.076 (2022).
Mao, D., Molina, L. A., Bonin, V. & McNaughton, B. L. Vision and locomotion combine to drive path integration sequences in mouse retrosplenial cortex. Curr. Biol. 30, 1680–1688.e4 (2020).
pubmed: 32197086 doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.02.070
Arleo, A. et al. Optic flow stimuli update anterodorsal thalamus head direction neuronal activity in rats. J. Neurosci. 33, 16790–16795 (2013).
pubmed: 24133279 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2698-13.2013
Sharp, P. E., Blair, H. T., Etkin, D. & Tzanetos, D. B. Influences of vestibular and visual motion information on the spatial firing patterns of hippocampal place cells. J. Neurosci. 15, 173–189 (1995).
pubmed: 7823128 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.15-01-00173.1995
Gaede, A. H. et al. Response properties of optic flow neurons in the accessory optic system of hummingbirds versus zebra finches and pigeons. J. Neurophysiol. 127, 130–144 (2022).
pubmed: 34851761 doi: 10.1152/jn.00437.2021
Mertes, M., Dittmar, L., Egelhaaf, M. & Boeddeker, N. Visual motion-sensitive neurons in the bumblebee brain convey information about landmarks during a navigational task. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 8, 335 (2014).
pubmed: 25309374 doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00335
Yu, C. P., Page, W. K., Gaborski, R. & Duffy, C. J. Receptive field dynamics underlying MST neuronal optic flow selectivity. J. Neurophysiol. 103, 2794–2807 (2010).
pubmed: 20457855 doi: 10.1152/jn.01085.2009
Greenlee, M. W. Human cortical areas underlying the perception of optic flow: brain imaging studies. Int. Rev. Neurobiol. 44, 269–292 (2000).
Stangl, M., Kanitscheider, I., Riemer, M., Fiete, I. & Wolbers, T. Sources of path integration error in young and aging humans. Nat. Commun. 11, 2626 (2020).
pubmed: 32457293 doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15805-9
Seguinot, V., Cattet, J. & Benhamou, S. Path integration in dogs. Anim. Behav. 55, 787–797 (1998).
pubmed: 9632467 doi: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0662
Campbell, M. G. et al. Principles governing the integration of landmark and self-motion cues in entorhinal cortical codes for navigation. Nat. Neurosci. 21, 1096–1106 (2018).
pubmed: 30038279 doi: 10.1038/s41593-018-0189-y
Raftery, A. E. Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociol. Methodol. 25, 111 (1995).
doi: 10.2307/271063
Samsonovich, A. & McNaughton, B. L. Path integration and cognitive mapping in a continuous attractor neural network model. J. Neurosci. 17, 5900–5920 (1997).
pubmed: 9221787 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.17-15-05900.1997
Carver, S., Kiemel, T. & Jeka, J. J. Modeling the dynamics of sensory reweighting. Biol. Cybern. 95, 123–134 (2006).
pubmed: 16639582 doi: 10.1007/s00422-006-0069-5
Wang, Q., Gao, E. & Burkhalter, A. Gateways of ventral and dorsal streams in mouse visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 31, 1905–1918 (2011).
pubmed: 21289200 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3488-10.2011
Roth, M. M. et al. Thalamic nuclei convey diverse contextual information to layer 1 of visual cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 19, 299–307 (2016).
pubmed: 26691828 doi: 10.1038/nn.4197
Blot, A. et al. Visual intracortical and transthalamic pathways carry distinct information to cortical areas. Neuron 109, 1996–2008.e6 (2021).
pubmed: 33979633 doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2021.04.017
Fetsch, C. R., DeAngelis, G. C. & Angelaki, D. E. Bridging the gap between theories of sensory cue integration and the physiology of multisensory neurons. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 14, 429–442 (2013).
pubmed: 23686172 doi: 10.1038/nrn3503
Contzen, M. P. Consensus based synchronization of clocks to diminish the effect of clock drifts in microgrids. IFAC Pap OnLine 53, 12980–12985 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2020.12.2144
Kloosterman, F., Layton, S. P., Chen, Z. & Wilson, M. S. Bayesian decoding using unsorted spikes in the rat hippocampus. J. Neurophysiol. 111, 217–227 (2014).
pubmed: 24089403 doi: 10.1152/jn.01046.2012
Hu, S. et al. Real-time readout of large-scale unsorted neural ensemble place codes. Cell Rep. 25, 2635–2642.e5 (2018).
pubmed: 30517852 pmcid: 6314684 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.11.033
Vagvolgyi, B. P., Jayakumar, R. P., Madhav, M. S., Knierim, J. J. & Cowan, N. J. Wide-angle, monocular head tracking using passive markers. J. Neurosci. Methods 368, 109453 (2022).
pubmed: 34968626 doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2021.109453
Quigley, M. et al. ROS: an open-source robot operating system. in ICRA Workshop on Open Source Software vol. 3 p. 5 (IEEE, 2009).
Kennedy, J. P. et al. A direct comparison of theta power and frequency to speed and acceleration. J. Neurosci. 42, 4326–4341 (2022).
pubmed: 35477905 pmcid: 9145239 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0987-21.2022
Pfeiffer, B. E. & Foster, D. J. Hippocampal place-cell sequences depict future paths to remembered goals. Nature 497, 74–79 (2013).
pubmed: 23594744 pmcid: 3990408 doi: 10.1038/nature12112
Jeewajee, A., Barry, C., O’Keefe, J. & Burgess, N. Grid cells and theta as oscillatory interference: electrophysiological data from freely moving rats. Hippocampus 18, 1175–1185 (2008).
pubmed: 19021251 doi: 10.1002/hipo.20510
Csicsvari, J., Hirase, H., Czurkó, A., Mamiya, A. & Buzsáki, G. Oscillatory coupling of hippocampal pyramidal cells and interneurons in the behaving Rat. J. Neurosci. 19, 274–287 (1999).
pubmed: 9870957 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.19-01-00274.1999
Branch, A. et al. An optimized tissue clearing protocol for rat brain labeling, imaging, and high throughput analysis. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/639674 (2019).

Auteurs

Manu S Madhav (MS)

Mind/Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. manu.madhav@ubc.ca.
Kavli Neuroscience Discovery Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. manu.madhav@ubc.ca.
Laboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. manu.madhav@ubc.ca.
School of Biomedical Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. manu.madhav@ubc.ca.
Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. manu.madhav@ubc.ca.

Ravikrishnan P Jayakumar (RP)

Mind/Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Laboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mechanical Engineering Department, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Brian Y Li (BY)

Mind/Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Shahin G Lashkari (SG)

Laboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mechanical Engineering Department, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Kelly Wright (K)

Mind/Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Francesco Savelli (F)

Mind/Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Department of Neuroscience, Developmental and Regenerative Biology, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA.

James J Knierim (JJ)

Mind/Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. jknierim@jhu.edu.
Kavli Neuroscience Discovery Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. jknierim@jhu.edu.
Solomon H. Snyder Department of Neuroscience, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. jknierim@jhu.edu.

Noah J Cowan (NJ)

Laboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. ncowan@jhu.edu.
Mechanical Engineering Department, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. ncowan@jhu.edu.

Classifications MeSH