Distinct temporal difference error signals in dopamine axons in three regions of the striatum in a decision-making task

Abstract

Different regions of the striatum regulate different types of behavior. However, how dopamine signals differ across striatal regions and how dopamine regulates different behaviors remain unclear. Here, we compared dopamine axon activity in the ventral, dorsomedial, and dorsolateral striatum, while mice performed a perceptual and value-based decision task. Surprisingly, dopamine axon activity was similar across all three areas. At a glance, the activity multiplexed different variables such as stimulus-associated values, confidence and reward feedback at different phases of the task. Our modeling demonstrates, however, that these modulations can be inclusively explained by moment-by-moment changes in the expected reward, i.e. the temporal difference error. A major difference between areas was the overall activity level of reward responses: reward responses in dorsolateral striatum were positively shifted, lacking inhibitory responses to negative prediction errors. The differences in dopamine signals put specific constraints on the properties of behaviors controlled by dopamine in these regions.

Data availability

A source code file has been provided for Figure 7. Fluorometry data has been deposited in Dryad available at: doi:10.5061/dryad.pg4f4qrmf.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Iku Tsutsui-Kimura

    Center for Brain Science, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Hideyuki Matsumoto

    Center for Brain Science, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Korleki Akiti

    Center for Brain Science, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Melissa M Yamada

    Center for Brain Science, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Naoshige Uchida

    Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    Naoshige Uchida, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5755-9409
  6. Mitsuko Watabe-Uchida

    Center for Brain Science, Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    For correspondence
    mitsuko@mcb.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7864-754X

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science

  • Iku Tsutsui-Kimura

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science

  • Hideyuki Matsumoto

National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH095953,R01MH101207,R01MH110404,R01NS108740)

  • Naoshige Uchida

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Joseph F Cheer, University of Maryland School of Medicine, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All procedures were performed in accordance with the National Institutes of Health Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and approved by the Harvard Animal Care and Use Committee (protocol #26-03). All surgeries were performed under aseptic conditions with animals anesthetized with isoflurane (1-2% at 0.5-1.0 l/min). Analgesia was administered pre (buprenorphine, 0.1 mg/kg, I.P) and postoperatively (ketoprofen, 5 mg/kg, I.P).

Version history

  1. Received: August 23, 2020
  2. Accepted: December 18, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 21, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: December 29, 2020 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2020, Tsutsui-Kimura 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

  • 4,838
    views
  • 757
    downloads
  • 67
    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. Iku Tsutsui-Kimura
  2. Hideyuki Matsumoto
  3. Korleki Akiti
  4. Melissa M Yamada
  5. Naoshige Uchida
  6. Mitsuko Watabe-Uchida
(2020)
Distinct temporal difference error signals in dopamine axons in three regions of the striatum in a decision-making task
eLife 9:e62390.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.62390

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.62390

Further reading

    1. Immunology and Inflammation
    2. Neuroscience
    Nicolas Aubert, Madeleine Purcarea ... Gilles Marodon
    Research Article

    CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ regulatory T cells (Treg) have been implicated in pain modulation in various inflammatory conditions. However, whether Treg cells hamper pain at steady state and by which mechanism is still unclear. From a meta-analysis of the transcriptomes of murine Treg and conventional T cells (Tconv), we observe that the proenkephalin gene (Penk), encoding the precursor of analgesic opioid peptides, ranks among the top 25 genes most enriched in Treg cells. We then present various evidence suggesting that Penk is regulated in part by members of the Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor (TNFR) family and the transcription factor Basic leucine zipper transcription faatf-like (BATF). Using mice in which the promoter activity of Penk can be tracked with a fluorescent reporter, we also show that Penk expression is mostly detected in Treg and activated Tconv in non-inflammatory conditions in the colon and skin. Functionally, Treg cells proficient or deficient for Penk suppress equally well the proliferation of effector T cells in vitro and autoimmune colitis in vivo. In contrast, inducible ablation of Penk in Treg leads to heat hyperalgesia in both male and female mice. Overall, our results indicate that Treg might play a key role at modulating basal somatic sensitivity in mice through the production of analgesic opioid peptides.

    1. Neuroscience
    James Malkin, Cian O'Donnell ... Laurence Aitchison
    Research Article

    Biological synaptic transmission is unreliable, and this unreliability likely degrades neural circuit performance. While there are biophysical mechanisms that can increase reliability, for instance by increasing vesicle release probability, these mechanisms cost energy. We examined four such mechanisms along with the associated scaling of the energetic costs. We then embedded these energetic costs for reliability in artificial neural networks (ANNs) with trainable stochastic synapses, and trained these networks on standard image classification tasks. The resulting networks revealed a tradeoff between circuit performance and the energetic cost of synaptic reliability. Additionally, the optimised networks exhibited two testable predictions consistent with pre-existing experimental data. Specifically, synapses with lower variability tended to have (1) higher input firing rates and (2) lower learning rates. Surprisingly, these predictions also arise when synapse statistics are inferred through Bayesian inference. Indeed, we were able to find a formal, theoretical link between the performance-reliability cost tradeoff and Bayesian inference. This connection suggests two incompatible possibilities: evolution may have chanced upon a scheme for implementing Bayesian inference by optimising energy efficiency, or alternatively, energy-efficient synapses may display signatures of Bayesian inference without actually using Bayes to reason about uncertainty.