1. Neuroscience
Download icon

Complementary congruent and opposite neurons achieve concurrent multisensory integration and segregation

  1. Wen-Hao Zhang
  2. He Wang
  3. Aihua Chen
  4. Yong Gu
  5. Tai Sing Lee
  6. K Y Michael Wong  Is a corresponding author
  7. Si Wu  Is a corresponding author
  1. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong
  2. East China Normal University, China
  3. Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
  4. Carnegie Mellon University, United States
  5. Peking University, China
Research Article
  • Cited 3
  • Views 1,806
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2019;8:e43753 doi: 10.7554/eLife.43753

Abstract

Our brain perceives the world by exploiting multisensory cues to extract information about various aspects of external stimuli. The sensory cues from the same stimulus should be integrated to improve perception, and otherwise segregated to distinguish different stimuli. In reality, however, the brain faces the challenge of recognizing stimuli without knowing in advance the sources of sensory cues. To address this challenge, we propose that the brain conducts integration and segregation concurrently with complementary neurons. Studying the inference of heading-direction via visual and vestibular cues, we develop a network model with two reciprocally connected modules modelling interacting visual-vestibular areas. In each module, there are two groups of neurons whose tunings under each sensory cue are either congruent or opposite. We show that congruent neurons implement integration, while opposite neurons compute cue disparity information for segregation, and the interplay between two groups of neurons achieves efficient multisensory information processing.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Wen-Hao Zhang

    Department of Physics, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. He Wang

    Department of Physics, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2101-8683
  3. Aihua Chen

    Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics, Primate Research Center, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Yong Gu

    Institute of Neuroscience, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4437-8956
  5. Tai Sing Lee

    Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. K Y Michael Wong

    Department of Physics, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
    For correspondence
    phkywong@ust.hk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7641-5024
  7. Si Wu

    School of Electronics Engineering and Computer Science, Peking University, Beijing, China
    For correspondence
    siwu@pku.edu.cn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (N HKUST606/12)

  • K Y Michael Wong

Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (605813)

  • K Y Michael Wong

Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (16322616)

  • K Y Michael Wong

Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (16306817)

  • K Y Michael Wong

National Basic Research Program of China (2014CB846101)

  • Si Wu

Natural Science Foundation of China (31261160495)

  • Si Wu

National Science Foundation (CISE1320651)

  • Tai Sing Lee

Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (D16PC00007)

  • Tai Sing Lee

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Peter Latham, University College London, United Kingdom

Publication history

  1. Received: November 19, 2018
  2. Accepted: May 22, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 23, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 13, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Zhang 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

  • 1,806
    Page views
  • 312
    Downloads
  • 3
    Citations

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. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Maria Schörnig et al.
    Research Article

    We generated induced excitatory neurons (iNeurons, iNs) from chimpanzee, bonobo and human stem cells by expressing the transcription factor neurogenin‑2 (NGN2). Single cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) showed that genes involved in dendrite and synapse development are expressed earlier during iNs maturation in the chimpanzee and bonobo than the human cells. In accordance, during the first two weeks of differentiation, chimpanzee and bonobo iNs showed repetitive action potentials and more spontaneous excitatory activity than human iNs, and extended neurites of higher total length. However, the axons of human iNs were slightly longer at 5 weeks of differentiation. The timing of the establishment of neuronal polarity did not differ between the species. Chimpanzee, bonobo and human neurites eventually reached the same level of structural complexity. Thus, human iNs develop slower than chimpanzee and bonobo iNs and this difference in timing likely depends on functions downstream of NGN2.

    1. Neuroscience
    Magda Dubois et al.
    Research Article Updated

    An exploration-exploitation trade-off, the arbitration between sampling a lesser-known against a known rich option, is thought to be solved using computationally demanding exploration algorithms. Given known limitations in human cognitive resources, we hypothesised the presence of additional cheaper strategies. We examined for such heuristics in choice behaviour where we show this involves a value-free random exploration, that ignores all prior knowledge, and a novelty exploration that targets novel options alone. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled drug study, assessing contributions of dopamine (400 mg amisulpride) and noradrenaline (40 mg propranolol), we show that value-free random exploration is attenuated under the influence of propranolol, but not under amisulpride. Our findings demonstrate that humans deploy distinct computationally cheap exploration strategies and that value-free random exploration is under noradrenergic control.