Mechanisms underlying the response of mouse cortical networks to optogenetic manipulation

  1. Alexandre Mahrach
  2. Guang Chen
  3. Nuo Li
  4. Carl van Vreeswijk
  5. David Hansel  Is a corresponding author
  1. CNRS-UMR 8002, France
  2. Baylor College of Medicine, United States

Abstract

GABAergic Interneurons can be subdivided into three subclasses: parvalbumin positive (PV), somatostatin positive (SOM) and serotonin positive neurons. With principal cells (PCs) they form complex networks. We examine PCs and PV responses in mouse anterior lateral motor cortex (ALM) and barrel cortex (S1) upon PV photostimulation in vivo. In ALM layer 5 and S1, the PV response is paradoxical: photoexcitation reduces their activity. This is not the case in ALM layer 2/3. We combine analytical calculations and numerical simulations to investigate how these results constrain the architecture. Two-population models cannot explain the results. Four-population networks with V1-like architecture account for the data in ALM layer 2/3 and layer 5. Our data in S1 can be explained if SOM neurons receive inputs only from PCs and PV neurons. In both four-population models, the paradoxical effect implies not too strong recurrent excitation. It is not evidence for stabilization by inhibition.

Data availability

Electrophysiology data and code used are available at Github (https://github.com/Amahrach/Paper4pop).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Alexandre Mahrach

    Integrative Neuroscience and Cognition Center, CNRS-UMR 8002, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Guang Chen

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Nuo Li

    Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Carl van Vreeswijk

    Integrative Neuroscience and Cognition Center, CNRS-UMR 8002, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. David Hansel

    Integrative Neuroscience and Cognition Center, CNRS-UMR 8002, Paris, France
    For correspondence
    david.hansel@parisdescartes.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1352-6592

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (14-NEUC-0001-01)

  • Carl van Vreeswijk

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (13-BSV4-0014-02)

  • David Hansel

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (09-SYSC-002-01)

  • David Hansel

Helen Hay Whitney Foundation

  • Nuo Li

Robert and Janice McNair Foundation

  • Nuo Li

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

  • Nuo Li

National Institutes of Health (NS104781)

  • Nuo Li

Pew Charitable Trusts

  • Nuo Li

Simons Collaboration on the Global Brain (543005)

  • Nuo Li

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All procedures were in accordance with protocols approved by the Janelia Research Campus and Baylor College of Medicine Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

Copyright

© 2020, Mahrach 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.

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. Alexandre Mahrach
  2. Guang Chen
  3. Nuo Li
  4. Carl van Vreeswijk
  5. David Hansel
(2020)
Mechanisms underlying the response of mouse cortical networks to optogenetic manipulation
eLife 9:e49967.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49967

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49967

Further reading

    1. Immunology and Inflammation
    2. Neuroscience
    Rocio Vicario, Stamatina Fragkogianni ... Frédéric Geissmann
    Research Article

    Somatic genetic heterogeneity resulting from post-zygotic DNA mutations is widespread in human tissues and can cause diseases, however, few studies have investigated its role in neurodegenerative processes such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Here, we report the selective enrichment of microglia clones carrying pathogenic variants, that are not present in neuronal, glia/stromal cells, or blood, from patients with AD in comparison to age-matched controls. Notably, microglia-specific AD-associated variants preferentially target the MAPK pathway, including recurrent CBL ring-domain mutations. These variants activate ERK and drive a microglia transcriptional program characterized by a strong neuro-inflammatory response, both in vitro and in patients. Although the natural history of AD-associated microglial clones is difficult to establish in humans, microglial expression of a MAPK pathway activating variant was previously shown to cause neurodegeneration in mice, suggesting that AD-associated neuroinflammatory microglial clones may contribute to the neurodegenerative process in patients.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Mahima Bose, Ishita Talwar ... Shubha Tole
    Research Article

    In the developing vertebrate central nervous system, neurons and glia typically arise sequentially from common progenitors. Here, we report that the transcription factor Forkhead Box G1 (Foxg1) regulates gliogenesis in the mouse neocortex via distinct cell-autonomous roles in progenitors and postmitotic neurons that regulate different aspects of the gliogenic FGF signalling pathway. We demonstrate that loss of Foxg1 in cortical progenitors at neurogenic stages causes premature astrogliogenesis. We identify a novel FOXG1 target, the pro-gliogenic FGF pathway component Fgfr3, which is suppressed by FOXG1 cell-autonomously to maintain neurogenesis. Furthermore, FOXG1 can also suppress premature astrogliogenesis triggered by the augmentation of FGF signalling. We identify a second novel function of FOXG1 in regulating the expression of gliogenic cues in newborn neocortical upper-layer neurons. Loss of FOXG1 in postmitotic neurons non-autonomously enhances gliogenesis in the progenitors via FGF signalling. These results fit well with the model that newborn neurons secrete cues that trigger progenitors to produce the next wave of cell types, astrocytes. If FGF signalling is attenuated in Foxg1 null progenitors, they progress to oligodendrocyte production. Therefore, loss of FOXG1 transitions the progenitor to a gliogenic state, producing either astrocytes or oligodendrocytes depending on FGF signalling levels. Our results uncover how FOXG1 integrates extrinsic signalling via the FGF pathway to regulate the sequential generation of neurons, astrocytes, and oligodendrocytes in the cerebral cortex.