1. Neuroscience
Download icon

A visual pathway for skylight polarization processing in Drosophila

  1. Ben J Hardcastle  Is a corresponding author
  2. Jaison J Omoto
  3. Pratyush Kandimalla
  4. Bao-Chau M Nguyen
  5. Mehmet F Keleş
  6. Natalie K Boyd
  7. Volker Hartenstein
  8. Mark A Frye
  1. University of California, Los Angeles, United States
Research Article
  • Cited 0
  • Views 432
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2021;10:e63225 doi: 10.7554/eLife.63225

Abstract

Many insects use patterns of polarized light in the sky to orient and navigate. Here we functionally characterize neural circuitry in the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, that conveys polarized light signals from the eye to the central complex, a brain region essential for the fly's sense of direction. Neurons tuned to the angle of polarization of ultraviolet light are found throughout the anterior visual pathway, connecting the optic lobes with the central complex via the anterior optic tubercle and bulb, in a homologous organization to the 'sky compass' pathways described in other insects. We detail how a consistent, map-like organization of neural tunings in the peripheral visual system is transformed into a reduced representation suited to flexible processing in the central brain. This study identifies computational motifs of the transformation, enabling mechanistic comparisons of multisensory integration and central processing for navigation in the brains of insects.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ben J Hardcastle

    Department of Integrative Biology and Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    For correspondence
    hardcastle@ucla.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4819-5631

  2. Jaison J Omoto

    Department of Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  3. Pratyush Kandimalla

    Department of Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  4. Bao-Chau M Nguyen

    Department of Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  5. Mehmet F Keleş

    Department of Integrative Biology and Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  6. Natalie K Boyd

    Department of Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  7. Volker Hartenstein

    Department of Molecular Cell and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  8. Mark A Frye

    Department of Integrative Biology and Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3277-3094

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01-NS096290)

  • Volker Hartenstein

National Institutes of Health (R01-EY026031)

  • Mark A Frye

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Claude Desplan, New York University, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: September 18, 2020
  2. Accepted: March 8, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 23, 2021 (version 1)

Copyright

© 2021, Hardcastle 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

  • 432
    Page views
  • 97
    Downloads
  • 0
    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)

Categories and tags

Research organism

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience

    Signed and unsigned reward prediction errors dynamically enhance learning and memory

    Nina Rouhani, Yael Niv
    Research Article Updated

    Memory helps guide behavior, but which experiences from the past are prioritized? Classic models of learning posit that events associated with unpredictable outcomes as well as, paradoxically, predictable outcomes, deploy more attention and learning for those events. Here, we test reinforcement learning and subsequent memory for those events, and treat signed and unsigned reward prediction errors (RPEs), experienced at the reward-predictive cue or reward outcome, as drivers of these two seemingly contradictory signals. By fitting reinforcement learning models to behavior, we find that both RPEs contribute to learning by modulating a dynamically changing learning rate. We further characterize the effects of these RPE signals on memory and show that both signed and unsigned RPEs enhance memory, in line with midbrain dopamine and locus-coeruleus modulation of hippocampal plasticity, thereby reconciling separate findings in the literature.

    1. Neuroscience

    Distinct neuronal populations contribute to trace conditioning and extinction learning in the hippocampal CA1

    Rebecca A Mount et al.
    Research Article

    Trace conditioning and extinction learning depend on the hippocampus, but it remains unclear how neural activity in the hippocampus is modulated during these two different behavioral processes. To explore this question, we performed calcium imaging from a large number of individual CA1 neurons during both trace eye-blink conditioning and subsequent extinction learning in mice. Our findings reveal that distinct populations of CA1 cells contribute to trace conditioned learning versus extinction learning, as learning emerges. Furthermore, we examined network connectivity by calculating co-activity between CA1 neuron pairs and found that CA1 network connectivity patterns also differ between conditioning and extinction, even though the overall connectivity density remains constant. Together, our results demonstrate that distinct populations of hippocampal CA1 neurons, forming different sub-networks with unique connectivity patterns, encode different aspects of learning.

    1. Neuroscience

    Gamma rhythms and visual information in mouse V1 specifically modulated by somatostatin+ neurons in reticular thalamus

    Mahmood S Hoseini et al.
    Research Article

    Visual perception in natural environments depends on the ability to focus on salient stimuli while ignoring distractions. This kind of selective visual attention is associated with gamma activity in the visual cortex. While the nucleus reticularis thalami (nRT) has been implicated in selective attention, its role in modulating gamma activity in the visual cortex remains unknown. Here we show that somatostatin- (SST) but not parvalbumin-expressing (PV) neurons in the visual sector of the nRT preferentially project to the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN), and modulate visual information transmission and gamma activity in primary visual cortex (V1). These findings pinpoint the SST neurons in nRT as powerful modulators of the visual information encoding accuracy in V1, and represent a novel circuit through which the nRT can influence representation of visual information.