Brain-wide mapping of neural activity controlling zebrafish exploratory locomotion

  1. Timothy W Dunn
  2. Yu Mu
  3. Sujatha Narayan
  4. Owen Randlett
  5. Eva A Naumann
  6. Chao-Tsung Yang
  7. Alexander F Schier
  8. Jeremy Freeman
  9. Florian Engert
  10. Misha B Ahrens  Is a corresponding author
  1. Harvard University, United States
  2. Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States

Abstract

In the absence of salient sensory cues to guide behavior, animals must still execute sequences of motor actions in order to forage and explore. How such successive motor actions are coordinated to form global locomotion trajectories is unknown. We mapped the structure of larval zebrafish swim trajectories in homogeneous environments and found that trajectories were characterized by alternating sequences of repeated turns to the left and to the right. Using whole-brain light-sheet imaging, we identified activity relating to the behavior in specific neural populations that we termed the anterior rhombencephalic turning region (ARTR). ARTR perturbations biased swim direction and reduced the dependence of turn direction on turn history, indicating that the ARTR is part of a network generating the temporal correlations in turn direction. We also find suggestive evidence for ARTR mutual inhibition and ARTR projections to premotor neurons. Finally, simulations suggest the observed turn sequences may underlie efficient exploration of local environments.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Timothy W Dunn

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Yu Mu

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Sujatha Narayan

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Owen Randlett

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Eva A Naumann

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Chao-Tsung Yang

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Alexander F Schier

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jeremy Freeman

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Florian Engert

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Misha B Ahrens

    Janelia Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Ashburn, United States
    For correspondence
    ahrensm@janelia.hhmi.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experiments presented in this study were conducted in accordance with the animal research guidelines from the National Institutes of Health and were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (#13-98) and Institutional Biosafety Committee of Janelia Research Campus.

Copyright

© 2016, Dunn et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 15,689
    views
  • 2,930
    downloads
  • 252
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Timothy W Dunn
  2. Yu Mu
  3. Sujatha Narayan
  4. Owen Randlett
  5. Eva A Naumann
  6. Chao-Tsung Yang
  7. Alexander F Schier
  8. Jeremy Freeman
  9. Florian Engert
  10. Misha B Ahrens
(2016)
Brain-wide mapping of neural activity controlling zebrafish exploratory locomotion
eLife 5:e12741.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12741

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.12741

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    David C Williams, Amanda Chu ... Michael A McDannald
    Research Advance

    Recognizing and responding to threat cues is essential to survival. Freezing is a predominant threat behavior in rats. We have recently shown that a threat cue can organize diverse behaviors beyond freezing, including locomotion (Chu et al., 2024). However, that experimental design was complex, required many sessions, and had rats receive many foot shock presentations. Moreover, the findings were descriptive. Here, we gave female and male Long Evans rats cue light illumination paired or unpaired with foot shock (8 total) in a conditioned suppression setting, using a range of shock intensities (0.15, 0.25, 0.35, or 0.50 mA). We found that conditioned suppression was only observed at higher foot shock intensities (0.35 mA and 0.50 mA). We constructed comprehensive temporal ethograms by scoring 22,272 frames across 12 behavior categories in 200-ms intervals around cue light illumination. The 0.50 mA and 0.35 mA shock-paired visual cues suppressed reward seeking, rearing, and scaling, as well as light-directed rearing and light-directed scaling. The shock-paired visual cue further elicited locomotion and freezing. Linear discriminant analyses showed that ethogram data could accurately classify rats into paired and unpaired groups. Using complete ethogram data produced superior classification compared to behavior subsets, including an Immobility subset featuring freezing. The results demonstrate diverse threat behaviors – in a short and simple procedure – containing sufficient information to distinguish the visual fear conditioning status of individual rats.

    1. Neuroscience
    Agnieszka Glica, Katarzyna Wasilewska ... Katarzyna Jednoróg
    Research Article

    The neural noise hypothesis of dyslexia posits an imbalance between excitatory and inhibitory (E/I) brain activity as an underlying mechanism of reading difficulties. This study provides the first direct test of this hypothesis using both electroencephalography (EEG) power spectrum measures in 120 Polish adolescents and young adults (60 with dyslexia, 60 controls) and glutamate (Glu) and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) concentrations from magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) at 7T MRI scanner in half of the sample. Our results, supported by Bayesian statistics, show no evidence of E/I balance differences between groups, challenging the hypothesis that cortical hyperexcitability underlies dyslexia. These findings suggest that alternative mechanisms must be explored and highlight the need for further research into the E/I balance and its role in neurodevelopmental disorders.