Abstract

For many organisms, searching for relevant targets such as food or mates entails active, strategic sampling of the environment. Finding odorous targets may be the most ancient search problem that motile organisms evolved to solve. While chemosensory navigation has been well characterized in micro-organisms and invertebrates, spatial olfaction in vertebrates is poorly understood. We have established an olfactory search assay in which freely-moving mice navigate noisy concentration gradients of airborne odor. Mice solve this task using concentration gradient cues and do not require stereo olfaction for performance. During task performance, respiration and nose movement are synchronized with tens of milliseconds precision. This synchrony is present during trials and largely absent during inter-trial intervals, suggesting that sniff-synchronized nose movement is a strategic behavioral state rather than simply a constant accompaniment to fast breathing. To reveal the spatiotemporal structure of these active sensing movements, we used machine learning methods to parse motion trajectories into elementary movement motifs. Motifs fall into two clusters, which correspond to investigation and approach states. Investigation motifs lock precisely to sniffing, such that the individual motifs preferentially occur at specific phases of the sniff cycle. The allocentric structure of investigation and approach indicate an advantage to sampling both sides of the sharpest part of the odor gradient, consistent with a serial sniff strategy for gradient sensing. This work clarifies sensorimotor strategies for mouse olfactory search and guides ongoing work into the underlying neural mechanisms.

Data availability

Source code is available on github at https://github.com/Smear-Lab/Olfactory_Search, and source data files are uploaded to Dryad.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Teresa M Findley

    Department of Biology, Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, Eugene, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. David G Wyrick

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Biology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8096-5766
  3. Jennifer L Cramer

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Biology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Morgan A Brown

    Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Blake Holcomb

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Robin Attey

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9652-8103
  7. Dorian Yeh

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Eric Monasevitch

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Nelly Nouboussi

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Isabelle Cullen

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Jeremea O Songco

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Biology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Jared F King

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Yashar Ahmadian

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Mathematics, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    For correspondence
    ya311@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5942-0697
  14. Matthew C Smear

    Institute of Neuroscience; Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, United States
    For correspondence
    smear@uoregon.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4689-388X

Funding

Whitehall Foundation (2015-12-201)

  • Matthew C Smear

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R56DC015584)

  • Matthew C Smear

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R21NS104935)

  • Matthew C Smear

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R34NS116731)

  • Matthew C Smear

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (F31DC016799)

  • Teresa M Findley

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (F32MH118724)

  • Morgan A Brown

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: his 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 (AUP-17-23) of the University of Oregon. All surgery was performed under sodium isofluorane anesthesia, and every effort was made to minimize suffering.

Copyright

© 2021, Findley 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

  • 3,633
    views
  • 447
    downloads
  • 44
    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. Teresa M Findley
  2. David G Wyrick
  3. Jennifer L Cramer
  4. Morgan A Brown
  5. Blake Holcomb
  6. Robin Attey
  7. Dorian Yeh
  8. Eric Monasevitch
  9. Nelly Nouboussi
  10. Isabelle Cullen
  11. Jeremea O Songco
  12. Jared F King
  13. Yashar Ahmadian
  14. Matthew C Smear
(2021)
Sniff-synchronized, gradient-guided olfactory search by freely-moving mice
eLife 10:e58523.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.58523

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.58523

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Denise M Poltavski, Alexander T Cunha ... Takako Makita
    Research Article

    Two major ligand-receptor signaling axes – endothelin Edn3 and its receptor Ednrb, and glial-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) and its receptor Ret – are required for migration of enteric nervous system (ENS) progenitors to the hindgut. Mutations in either component cause colonic aganglionosis, also called Hirschsprung disease. Here, we have used Wnt1Cre and Pax2Cre in mice to show that these driver lines label distinct ENS lineages during progenitor migration and in their terminal hindgut fates. Both Cre lines result in Hirschsprung disease when combined with conditional Ednrb or conditional Ret alleles. In vitro explant assays and analysis of lineage-labeled mutant embryos show that GDNF but not Edn3 is a migration cue for cells of both lineages. Instead, Edn3-Ednrb function is required in both for GDNF responsiveness albeit in different ways: by expanding the Ret+ population in the Pax2Cre lineage, and by supporting Ret function in Wnt1Cre-derived cells. Our results demonstrate that two distinct lineages of progenitors give rise to the ENS, and that these divergently utilize endothelin signaling to support migration to the hindgut.

    1. Neuroscience
    Jing Wang, Min Su ... Hailin Zhang
    Research Article

    The slow-intrinsic-pacemaker dopaminergic (DA) neurons originating in the ventral tegmental area (VTA) are implicated in various mood- and emotion-related disorders, such as anxiety, fear, stress and depression. Abnormal activity of projection-specific VTA DA neurons is the key factor in the development of these disorders. Here, we describe the crucial role of the NALCN and TRPC6, non-selective cation channels in mediating the subthreshold inward depolarizing current and driving the firing of action potentials of VTA DA neurons in physiological conditions. Furthermore, we demonstrate that down-regulation of TRPC6 protein expression in the VTA DA neurons likely contributes to the reduced activity of projection-specific VTA DA neurons in chronic mild unpredictable stress (CMUS) depressive mice. In consistent with these, selective knockdown of TRPC6 channels in the VTA DA neurons conferred mice with depression-like behavior. This current study suggests down-regulation of TRPC6 expression/function is involved in reduced VTA DA neuron firing and chronic stress-induced depression-like behavior of mice.