Hippocampal inputs engage CCK+ interneurons to mediate endocannabinoid-modulated feed-forward inhibition in the prefrontal cortex

  1. Xingchen Liu
  2. Jordane Dimidschstein
  3. Gordon Fishell
  4. Adam G Carter  Is a corresponding author
  1. New York University, United States
  2. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, United States
  3. Harvard Medical School, United States

Abstract

Connections from the ventral hippocampus (vHPC) to the prefrontal cortex (PFC) regulate cognition, emotion and memory. These functions are also tightly controlled by inhibitory networks in the PFC, whose disruption is thought to contribute to mental health disorders. However, relatively little is known about how the vHPC engages different populations of interneurons in the PFC. Here we use slice physiology and optogenetics to study vHPC-evoked feed-forward inhibition in the mouse PFC. We first show that cholecystokinin (CCK+), parvalbumin (PV+), and somatostatin (SOM+) expressing interneurons are prominent in layer 5 (L5) of infralimbic PFC. We then show that vHPC inputs primarily activate CCK+ and PV+ interneurons, with weaker connections onto SOM+ interneurons. CCK+ interneurons make stronger synapses onto pyramidal tract (PT) cells over nearby intratelencephalic (IT) cells. However, CCK+ inputs undergo depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition (DSI) and CB1 receptor modulation only at IT cells. Moreover, vHPC-evoked feed-forward inhibition undergoes DSI only at IT cells, confirming a central role for CCK+ interneurons. Together, our findings show how vHPC directly engages multiple populations of inhibitory cells in deep layers of the infralimbic PFC, highlighting unexpected roles for both CCK+ interneurons and endocannabinoid modulation in hippocampal-prefrontal communication.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Xingchen Liu

    Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jordane Dimidschstein

    Stanley Center for Psychiatric Research, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Gordon Fishell

    Department of Neurobiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9640-9278
  4. Adam G Carter

    Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    agc5@nyu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2095-3901

Funding

National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH085974)

  • Adam G Carter

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 university animal welfare committee (UAWC) protocols (#07-1281) of New York University.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Sacha B Nelson, Brandeis University, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: January 18, 2020
  2. Accepted: October 8, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: October 9, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: November 3, 2020 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2020, Liu 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

  • 2,627
    Page views
  • 423
    Downloads
  • 9
    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)

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. Xingchen Liu
  2. Jordane Dimidschstein
  3. Gordon Fishell
  4. Adam G Carter
(2020)
Hippocampal inputs engage CCK+ interneurons to mediate endocannabinoid-modulated feed-forward inhibition in the prefrontal cortex
eLife 9:e55267.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55267

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Charlotte Arlt et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Neural activity in the mammalian cortex has been studied extensively during decision tasks, and recent work aims to identify under what conditions cortex is actually necessary for these tasks. We discovered that mice with distinct cognitive experiences, beyond sensory and motor learning, use different cortical areas and neural activity patterns to solve the same navigation decision task, revealing past learning as a critical determinant of whether cortex is necessary for goal-directed navigation. We used optogenetics and calcium imaging to study the necessity and neural activity of multiple cortical areas in mice with different training histories. Posterior parietal cortex and retrosplenial cortex were mostly dispensable for accurate performance of a simple navigation task. In contrast, these areas were essential for the same simple task when mice were previously trained on complex tasks with delay periods or association switches. Multiarea calcium imaging showed that, in mice with complex-task experience, single-neuron activity had higher selectivity and neuron–neuron correlations were weaker, leading to codes with higher task information. Therefore, past experience is a key factor in determining whether cortical areas have a causal role in goal-directed navigation.

    1. Neuroscience
    Payel Chatterjee et al.
    Research Article Updated

    During flight maneuvers, insects exhibit compensatory head movements which are essential for stabilizing the visual field on their retina, reducing motion blur, and supporting visual self-motion estimation. In Diptera, such head movements are mediated via visual feedback from their compound eyes that detect retinal slip, as well as rapid mechanosensory feedback from their halteres – the modified hindwings that sense the angular rates of body rotations. Because non-Dipteran insects lack halteres, it is not known if mechanosensory feedback about body rotations plays any role in their head stabilization response. Diverse non-Dipteran insects are known to rely on visual and antennal mechanosensory feedback for flight control. In hawkmoths, for instance, reduction of antennal mechanosensory feedback severely compromises their ability to control flight. Similarly, when the head movements of freely flying moths are restricted, their flight ability is also severely impaired. The role of compensatory head movements as well as multimodal feedback in insect flight raises an interesting question: in insects that lack halteres, what sensory cues are required for head stabilization? Here, we show that in the nocturnal hawkmoth Daphnis nerii, compensatory head movements are mediated by combined visual and antennal mechanosensory feedback. We subjected tethered moths to open-loop body roll rotations under different lighting conditions, and measured their ability to maintain head angle in the presence or absence of antennal mechanosensory feedback. Our study suggests that head stabilization in moths is mediated primarily by visual feedback during roll movements at lower frequencies, whereas antennal mechanosensory feedback is required when roll occurs at higher frequency. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that control of head angle results from a multimodal feedback loop that integrates both visual and antennal mechanosensory feedback, albeit at different latencies. At adequate light levels, visual feedback is sufficient for head stabilization primarily at low frequencies of body roll. However, under dark conditions, antennal mechanosensory feedback is essential for the control of head movements at high frequencies of body roll.