CA2 neuronal activity controls hippocampal low gamma and ripple oscillations

  1. Georgia M Alexander
  2. Logan Y Brown
  3. Shannon Farris
  4. Daniel Lustberg
  5. Caroline Pantazis
  6. Bernd Gloss
  7. Nicholas W Plummer
  8. Patricia Jensen
  9. Serena M Dudek  Is a corresponding author
  1. National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, United States

Abstract

Hippocampal oscillations arise from coordinated activity among distinct populations of neurons and are associated with cognitive functions. Much progress has been made toward identifying the contribution of specific neuronal populations in hippocampal oscillations, but less is known about the role of hippocampal area CA2, which is thought to support social memory. Furthermore, the little evidence on the role of CA2 in oscillations has yielded conflicting conclusions. Therefore, we sought to identify the contribution of CA2 to oscillations using a controlled experimental system. We used excitatory and inhibitory DREADDs to manipulate CA2 neuronal activity and studied resulting hippocampal-prefrontal cortical network oscillations. We found that modification of CA2 activity bidirectionally regulated hippocampal and prefrontal cortical low gamma oscillations and inversely modulated hippocampal ripple oscillations in mice. These findings support a role for CA2 in low gamma generation and ripple modulation within the hippocampus and underscore the importance of CA2 in extrahippocampal oscillations.

Data availability

The mouse line used in this study will be made freely available through Jackson Laboratories. The data used to generate bar graphs in figures are listed in Supplementary File 1.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Georgia M Alexander

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4245-4417
  2. Logan Y Brown

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Shannon Farris

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4473-1684
  4. Daniel Lustberg

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Caroline Pantazis

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Bernd Gloss

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Nicholas W Plummer

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Patricia Jensen

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Serena M Dudek

    Neurobiology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Science, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    For correspondence
    dudek@niehs.nih.gov
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4094-8368

Funding

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (ES100221)

  • Serena M Dudek

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All of the animals were handled according to approved institutional animal care and use committee (ACUC) protocol (#2009-0023) of the NIEHS (A4149-1). All surgery was performed under ketamine and xylazine anesthesia, and every effort was made to minimize suffering.

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 3,831
    views
  • 632
    downloads
  • 66
    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. Georgia M Alexander
  2. Logan Y Brown
  3. Shannon Farris
  4. Daniel Lustberg
  5. Caroline Pantazis
  6. Bernd Gloss
  7. Nicholas W Plummer
  8. Patricia Jensen
  9. Serena M Dudek
(2018)
CA2 neuronal activity controls hippocampal low gamma and ripple oscillations
eLife 7:e38052.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38052

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38052

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Lisa M Bas, Ian D Roberts ... Anita Tusche
    Research Article

    People selectively help others based on perceptions of their merit or need. Here, we develop a neurocomputational account of how these social perceptions translate into social choice. Using a novel fMRI social perception task, we show that both merit and need perceptions recruited the brain’s social inference network. A behavioral computational model identified two non-exclusive mechanisms underlying variance in social perceptions: a consistent tendency to perceive others as meritorious/needy (bias) and a propensity to sample and integrate normative evidence distinguishing high from low merit/need in other people (sensitivity). Variance in people’s merit (but not need) bias and sensitivity independently predicted distinct aspects of altruism in a social choice task completed months later. An individual’s merit bias predicted context-independent variance in people’s overall other-regard during altruistic choice, biasing people toward prosocial actions. An individual’s merit sensitivity predicted context-sensitive discrimination in generosity toward high and low merit recipients by influencing other- and self-regard during altruistic decision-making. This context-sensitive perception–action link was associated with activation in the right temporoparietal junction. Together, these findings point toward stable, biologically based individual differences in perceptual processes related to abstract social concepts like merit, and suggest that these differences may have important behavioral implications for an individual’s tendency toward favoritism or discrimination in social settings.

    1. Neuroscience
    Silas E Busch, Christian Hansel
    Research Article

    Purkinje cell (PC) dendrites are optimized to integrate the vast cerebellar input array and drive the sole cortical output. PCs are classically seen as stereotypical computational units, yet mouse PCs are morphologically diverse and those with multi-branched structure can receive non-canonical climbing fiber (CF) multi-innervation that confers independent compartment-specific signaling. While otherwise uncharacterized, human PCs are universally multi-branched. Do they exceed allometry to achieve enhanced integrative capacities relative to mouse PCs? To answer this, we used several comparative histology techniques in adult human and mouse to analyze cellular morphology, parallel fiber (PF) and CF input arrangement, and regional PC demographics. Human PCs are substantially larger than previously described; they exceed allometric constraint by cortical thickness and are the largest neuron in the brain with 6–7 cm total dendritic length. Unlike mouse, human PC dendrites ramify horizontally to form a multi-compartment motif that we show can receive multiple CFs. Human spines are denser (6.9 vs 4.9 spines/μm), larger (~0.36 vs 0.29 μm), and include an unreported ‘spine cluster’ structure—features that may be congruent with enhanced PF association and amplification as human-specific adaptations. By extrapolation, human PCs may receive 500,000 to 1 million synaptic inputs compared with 30–40,000 in mouse. Collectively, human PC morphology and input arrangement is quantitatively and qualitatively distinct from rodent. Multi-branched PCs are more prevalent in posterior and lateral cerebellum, co-varying with functional boundaries, supporting the hypothesis that this morphological motif permits expanded input multiplexing and may subserve task-dependent needs for input association.