Brain-wide cellular resolution imaging of Cre transgenic zebrafish lines for functional circuit-mapping

  1. Kathryn M Tabor
  2. Gregory D Marquart
  3. Christopher Hurt
  4. Trevor S Smith
  5. Alexandra K Geoca
  6. Ashwin A Bhandiwad
  7. Abhignya Subedi
  8. Jennifer L Sinclair
  9. Hannah M Rose
  10. Nicholas F Polys
  11. Harold A Burgess  Is a corresponding author
  1. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, United States
  2. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, United States

Abstract

Decoding the functional connectivity of the nervous system is facilitated by transgenic methods that express a genetically encoded reporter or effector in specific neurons; however, most transgenic lines show broad spatiotemporal and cell-type expression. Increased specificity can be achieved using intersectional genetic methods which restrict reporter expression to cells that co-express multiple drivers, such as Gal4 and Cre. To facilitate intersectional targeting in zebrafish, we have generated more than 50 new Cre lines, and co-registered brain expression images with the Zebrafish Brain Browser, a cellular resolution atlas of 264 transgenic lines. Lines labeling neurons of interest can be identified using a web-browser to perform a 3D spatial search (zbbrowser.com). This resource facilitates the design of intersectional genetic experiments and will advance a wide range of precision circuit-mapping studies.

Data availability

Registered individual confocal brain scans have been deposited in Dryad https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.tk467n8

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Kathryn M Tabor

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Gregory D Marquart

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9811-5372
  3. Christopher Hurt

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Trevor S Smith

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Alexandra K Geoca

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ashwin A Bhandiwad

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Abhignya Subedi

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jennifer L Sinclair

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Hannah M Rose

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Nicholas F Polys

    Department of Computer Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Harold A Burgess

    Division of Developmental Biology, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States
    For correspondence
    burgessha@mail.nih.gov
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1966-7801

Funding

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1ZIAHD008884-04)

  • Harold A Burgess

Virginia Tech Advanced Research Computing (NA)

  • Nicholas F Polys

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 (IACUC) protocols (#15-039) of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Indira M Raman, Northwestern University, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: October 8, 2018
  2. Accepted: February 7, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: February 8, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: February 27, 2019 (version 2)

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

  • 4,344
    Page views
  • 563
    Downloads
  • 31
    Citations

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

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. Kathryn M Tabor
  2. Gregory D Marquart
  3. Christopher Hurt
  4. Trevor S Smith
  5. Alexandra K Geoca
  6. Ashwin A Bhandiwad
  7. Abhignya Subedi
  8. Jennifer L Sinclair
  9. Hannah M Rose
  10. Nicholas F Polys
  11. Harold A Burgess
(2019)
Brain-wide cellular resolution imaging of Cre transgenic zebrafish lines for functional circuit-mapping
eLife 8:e42687.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.42687
  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Sanja Jasek, Csaba Verasztó ... Gáspár Jékely
    Research Article Updated

    Cells form networks in animal tissues through synaptic, chemical, and adhesive links. Invertebrate muscle cells often connect to other cells through desmosomes, adhesive junctions anchored by intermediate filaments. To study desmosomal networks, we skeletonised 853 muscle cells and their desmosomal partners in volume electron microscopy data covering an entire larva of the annelid Platynereis. Muscle cells adhere to each other, to epithelial, glial, ciliated, and bristle-producing cells and to the basal lamina, forming a desmosomal connectome of over 2000 cells. The aciculae – chitin rods that form an endoskeleton in the segmental appendages – are highly connected hubs in this network. This agrees with the many degrees of freedom of their movement, as revealed by video microscopy. Mapping motoneuron synapses to the desmosomal connectome allowed us to infer the extent of tissue influenced by motoneurons. Our work shows how cellular-level maps of synaptic and adherent force networks can elucidate body mechanics.

    1. Neuroscience
    Javad Karimi Abadchi, Zahra Rezaei ... Majid H Mohajerani
    Research Article Updated

    Coordinated peri-ripple activity in the hippocampal-neocortical network is essential for mnemonic information processing in the brain. Hippocampal ripples likely serve different functions in sleep and awake states. Thus, the corresponding neocortical activity patterns may differ in important ways. We addressed this possibility by conducting voltage and glutamate wide-field imaging of the neocortex with concurrent hippocampal electrophysiology in awake mice. Contrary to our previously published sleep results, deactivation and activation were dominant in post-ripple neocortical voltage and glutamate activity, respectively, especially in the agranular retrosplenial cortex (aRSC). Additionally, the spiking activity of aRSC neurons, estimated by two-photon calcium imaging, revealed the existence of two subpopulations of excitatory neurons with opposite peri-ripple modulation patterns: one increases and the other decreases firing rate. These differences in peri-ripple spatiotemporal patterns of neocortical activity in sleep versus awake states might underlie the reported differences in the function of sleep versus awake ripples.