Homotopic contralesional excitation suppresses spontaneous circuit repair and global network reconnections following ischemic stroke
Abstract
Understanding circuit-level manipulations that affect the brain's capacity for plasticity will inform the design of targeted interventions that enhance recovery after stroke. Following stroke, increased contralesional activity (e.g. use of the unaffected limb) can negatively influence recovery, but it is unknown which specific neural connections exert this influence, and to what extent increased contralesional activity affects systems- and molecular-level biomarkers of recovery. Here, we combine optogenetic photostimulation with optical intrinsic signal imaging (OISI) to examine how contralesional excitatory activity affects cortical remodeling after stroke in mice. Following photothrombosis of left primary somatosensory forepaw (S1FP) cortex, mice either recovered spontaneously or received chronic optogenetic excitation of right S1FP over the course of 4 weeks. Contralesional excitation suppressed perilesional S1FP remapping and was associated with abnormal patterns of stimulus-evoked activity in the unaffected limb. This maneuver also prevented the restoration of resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) within the S1FP network, RSFC in several networks functionally-distinct from somatomotor regions, and resulted in persistent limb-use asymmetry. In stimulated mice, perilesional tissue exhibited transcriptional changes in several genes relevant for recovery. Our results suggest that contralesional excitation impedes local and global circuit reconnection through suppression of cortical activity and several neuroplasticity-related genes after stroke, and highlight the importance of site selection for therapeutic intervention after focal ischemia.
Data availability
Data reported in Figures 1, 6, 7 are publicly available:Fig. 1: https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Cylinder_Rearing_Scores/19773487Fig. 6: https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Neuroimaging_Data_Pre_Post_Stroke_for_26-03-2021-RA-eLife-68852/19773244Fig. 7: https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/RT-PCR_Data/19773364Data reported in Figures 2, 3, 4, 5 are unavailable due to technical issues with storage hard drives.Analysis code is available at https://github.com/BauerLabCodebase
Article and author information
Author details
Funding
National Institutes of Health (R01NS102870)
- Adam Q Bauer
National Institutes of Health (F31NS103275)
- Zachary Pollack Rosenthal
McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience
- Adam Q Bauer
The Alborada Trust
- Tadeusz Wieloch
The Wachtmeister Foundation
- Tadeusz Wieloch
Swedish Research Council
- Tadeusz Wieloch
National Institutes of Health (K25NS083754)
- Adam Q Bauer
National Institutes of Health (R37NS110699)
- Jin-Moo Lee
National Institutes of Health (R01NS084028)
- Jin-Moo Lee
National Institutes of Health (R01NS094692)
- Jin-Moo Lee
National Institutes of Health (R01NS078223)
- Joseph P Culver
National Institutes of Health (P01NS080675)
- Joseph P Culver
National Institutes of Health (R01NS099429)
- Joseph P Culver
National Institutes of Health (F31NS089135)
- Andrew W Kraft
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 described below were approved by theWashington University Animal Studies Committee in compliance with theAmerican Association for Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care guidelines (Protocol #20-0022)
Copyright
© 2022, Bice 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
-
- 1,340
- views
-
- 316
- downloads
-
- 20
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
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)
Further reading
-
- Neuroscience
Recognizing goal-directed actions is a computationally challenging task, requiring not only the visual analysis of body movements, but also analysis of how these movements causally impact, and thereby induce a change in, those objects targeted by an action. We tested the hypothesis that the analysis of body movements and the effects they induce relies on distinct neural representations in superior and anterior inferior parietal lobe (SPL and aIPL). In four fMRI sessions, participants observed videos of actions (e.g. breaking stick, squashing plastic bottle) along with corresponding point-light-display (PLD) stick figures, pantomimes, and abstract animations of agent–object interactions (e.g. dividing or compressing a circle). Cross-decoding between actions and animations revealed that aIPL encodes abstract representations of action effect structures independent of motion and object identity. By contrast, cross-decoding between actions and PLDs revealed that SPL is disproportionally tuned to body movements independent of visible interactions with objects. Lateral occipitotemporal cortex (LOTC) was sensitive to both action effects and body movements. These results demonstrate that parietal cortex and LOTC are tuned to physical action features, such as how body parts move in space relative to each other and how body parts interact with objects to induce a change (e.g. in position or shape/configuration). The high level of abstraction revealed by cross-decoding suggests a general neural code supporting mechanical reasoning about how entities interact with, and have effects on, each other.
-
- Neuroscience
Our movements result in predictable sensory feedback that is often multimodal. Based on deviations between predictions and actual sensory input, primary sensory areas of cortex have been shown to compute sensorimotor prediction errors. How prediction errors in one sensory modality influence the computation of prediction errors in another modality is still unclear. To investigate multimodal prediction errors in mouse auditory cortex, we used a virtual environment to experimentally couple running to both self-generated auditory and visual feedback. Using two-photon microscopy, we first characterized responses of layer 2/3 (L2/3) neurons to sounds, visual stimuli, and running onsets and found responses to all three stimuli. Probing responses evoked by audiomotor (AM) mismatches, we found that they closely resemble visuomotor (VM) mismatch responses in visual cortex (V1). Finally, testing for cross modal influence on AM mismatch responses by coupling both sound amplitude and visual flow speed to the speed of running, we found that AM mismatch responses were amplified when paired with concurrent VM mismatches. Our results demonstrate that multimodal and non-hierarchical interactions shape prediction error responses in cortical L2/3.