1. Neuroscience
Download icon

Visual Behavior: The eyes have it

  1. Mehmet Keleş
  2. Mark A Frye  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California, Los Angeles, United States
  • Cited 4
  • Views 1,701
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2017;6:e24896 doi: 10.7554/eLife.24896


Molecular genetic experiments are revealing how the fly brain generates behavioral responses to visual stimuli.

Main text

Like us, flies depend on their sense of sight. When a fly perceives an approaching object, such as a fly swatter, it repositions itself and executes an escape strategy in less time than the blink of an eye (Card and Dickinson, 2008). Flies produce an impressive repertoire of visual behaviors, including escape, with a brain that contains a relatively small number of neurons. Drosophila melanogaster, the fruit fly, has become an enormously useful model for studying visual behavior, yet the neural mechanisms for transforming object signals (such as an approaching swatter) into motor actions (escape) remain poorly understood.

The Drosophila retina is composed of roughly 700 hexagonal facets, each viewing a small portion of the visual field, and signals from the photoreceptors within each facet are processed by four optic lobes in the brain. The processing in these optic lobes happens in a retinotopic fashion: in other words, signals from neighboring facets are passed through the optic lobes by neighboring columns of neurons. The signals are first processed by an optic lobe called the lamina, followed by the medulla, and then the lobula and the lobula plate (Figure 1). The last two lobes collate retinotopic information from all the inputs and project axons that carry filtered signals to structures elsewhere in the brain.

Transforming visual signals into motor actions.

(A) Visual features that are important to the fly include looming (top), small moving objects, colors, and vertical edges. (B) Wu et al. identified 22 different classes of visual projection neurons (VPNs) in the lobula (Lo), with all the neurons in a given class projecting to a specific glomerulus in the brain. Five examples are shown schematically. Wu et al. also observed that the neurons have dendritic innervations within anatomically distinct layers of the lobula (indicated by white dashed lines). (C) Neighboring columns of neurons in the lobula (indicated by black dashed lines) sample neighboring regions of space. The neurons in a given VPN class have overlapping dendritic fields, which corresponds to overlaps in the sampling of visual space. The axon terminals, on the other hand, completely innervate the glomerulus for that VPN class. (D) It is thought that each VPN class responds to a visual feature (panel A) and contributes to a particular form of behavior (panel D).

Lobula plate neurons have been studied for 60 years and it is known that they compute patterns of visual motion across the eye to guide navigation tasks (Borst, 2014). However, much less is known about the lobula, even though it contains four times as many neurons (Strausfeld, 1976). Now, in eLife, Aljoscha Nern, Gerald Rubin and colleagues at the Janelia Research Campus – including Ming Wu and Nern as joint first authors – report the results of a series of anatomical and behavioral experiments to understand the architecture and functions of these neurons (Wu et al., 2016). In particular they identify 22 different classes of visual projection neurons (VPN) in the lobula, and show that specific classes of neurons elicit specific visual behaviors, such as escape.

The power of Drosophila genetics is deployed in full force here. Wu et al. first screened large collections of genetically modified flies to find lines in which it is possible to fluorescently label all the retinotopic neurons of a given VPN class that project from the lobula to the center of the brain. Then they stochastically labeled a few individual neurons in each of the 22 VPN classes with different fluorescent colors. This systematic approach allowed them to take high-resolution pictures of input dendrites and output axon terminals, and to demonstrate that each VPN class had a characteristic number of cells, dendritic span, and axon output location (Figure 1B). Whereas the input dendrites in each class were organized in a retinotopic fashion, the axon terminals were fully intermingled to form an optic glomerulus. Strikingly, it would appear that the spatial information contained in the inputs is thrown away because it is not contained in the outputs (Figure 1C).

Next, Wu et. al. investigated the behavioral role of each VPN class by testing whether the use of light to activate the neurons in a particular class provoked any observable behavioral reactions. Activation of two classes (called LC6 and LC16) resulted in significant jumping and backward walking, which are hallmarks of visual escape behavior. In further tests strong calcium currents were detected in both classes when the flies were presented with a looming stimulus (like an approaching fly swatter). It would appear that LC6 and LC16 neurons transform looming visual information into the motor control of a rapid escape behavior (also see von Reyn et al., 2014).

In addition to shedding new light on lobula projection neurons, the work of Wu et al. also raises exciting new questions. 1) What is the functional benefit of losing the retinotopic information that was contained in the input to the lobula? 2) Individual members of a given class have overlapping dendritic fields, which means that a given region of visual space is covered more than once: what is the benefit to this oversampling? 3) As Wu et al. demonstrate, a single type of behavior can be initiated by more than one class of neurons. This means that activating a given class may be sufficient to provoke a specific behavior, but silencing the same class does not necessarily quell that behavior. What gives rise to the apparent redundancy within the brain? 4) We recently performed a complimentary comprehensive physiological characterization of one these VPN classes: this study revealed complex spatial inhibitory interactions, indicating that only a fraction of the neurons in this class are activated by the salient visual stimulus (Keleş and Frye, 2017). Therefore, as Wu et al. note, the use of optogenetic techniques to simultaneously activate the whole population of neurons does not mimic what happens naturally. How does the output sent to the glomerulus reflect the spatial dynamics of the inputs?

Based on what we currently know about the functional properties of lobula visual projection neurons (Keleş and Frye, 2017; Mu et al., 2012), activity within a given optic glomerulus seems to correspond to the presence of a visual feature rather than its direction of movement or spatial location. In flies and mammals, the spatial pattern of olfactory glomeruli can signal the identity and intensity of an odorant (Wang et al., 2003). Perhaps something similar is happening here, with the pattern of activation across different optic glomeruli signaling particular features of visual objects rather than their motion or location. The approaches developed by Wu et al. are likely to prove very useful for exploring this hypothesis and for studying how visual representations are transformed into behavioral commands more generally.


  1. Book
    1. Strausfeld NJ
    Atlas of an Insect Brain
    Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Mehmet Keleş

    Department of Integrative Biology and Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Mark A Frye

    Department of Integrative Biology and Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    For correspondence
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3277-3094

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published: February 6, 2017 (version 1)


© 2017, Keleş et al.

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


  • 1,701
    Page views
  • 186
  • 4

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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)

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

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

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Josephine Henke et al.
    Research Article Updated

    As we interact with the external world, we judge magnitudes from sensory information. The estimation of magnitudes has been characterized in primates, yet it is largely unexplored in nonprimate species. Here, we use time interval reproduction to study rodent behavior and its neural correlates in the context of magnitude estimation. We show that gerbils display primate-like magnitude estimation characteristics in time reproduction. Most prominently their behavioral responses show a systematic overestimation of small stimuli and an underestimation of large stimuli, often referred to as regression effect. We investigated the underlying neural mechanisms by recording from medial prefrontal cortex and show that the majority of neurons respond either during the measurement or the reproduction of a time interval. Cells that are active during both phases display distinct response patterns. We categorize the neural responses into multiple types and demonstrate that only populations with mixed responses can encode the bias of the regression effect. These results help unveil the organizing neural principles of time reproduction and perhaps magnitude estimation in general.

    1. Neuroscience
    Davide Potrich et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Debates have arisen as to whether non-human animals actually can learn abstract non-symbolic numerousness or whether they always rely on some continuous physical aspect of the stimuli, covarying with number. Here, we investigated archerfish (Toxotes jaculatrix) non-symbolic numerical discrimination with accurate control for covarying continuous physical stimulus attributes. Archerfish were trained to select one of two groups of black dots (Exp. 1: 3 vs 6 elements; Exp. 2: 2 vs 3 elements); these were controlled for several combinations of physical variables (elements’ size, overall area, overall perimeter, density, and sparsity), ensuring that only numerical information was available. Generalization tests with novel numerical comparisons (2 vs 3, 5 vs 8, and 6 vs 9 in Exp. 1; 3 vs 4, 3 vs 6 in Exp. 2) revealed choice for the largest or smallest numerical group according to the relative number that was rewarded at training. None of the continuous physical variables, including spatial frequency, were affecting archerfish performance. Results provide evidence that archerfish spontaneously use abstract relative numerical information for both small and large numbers when only numerical cues are available.