A projectome of the bumblebee central complex

  1. Marcel Ethan Sayre  Is a corresponding author
  2. Rachel Templin
  3. Johanna Chavez
  4. Julian Kempenaers
  5. Stanley Heinze  Is a corresponding author
  1. Lund University, Sweden
  2. University of Queensland, Australia

Abstract

Insects have evolved diverse and remarkable strategies for navigating in various ecologies all over the world. Regardless of species, insects share the presence of a group of morphologically conserved neuropils known collectively as the central complex (CX). The CX is a navigational center, involved in sensory integration and coordinated motor activity. Despite the fact that our understanding of navigational behavior comes predominantly from ants and bees, most of what we know about the underlying neural circuitry of such behavior comes from work in fruit flies. Here we aim to close this gap, by providing the first comprehensive map of all major columnar neurons and their projection patterns in the CX of a bee. We find numerous components of the circuit that appear to be highly conserved between the fly and the bee, but also highlight several key differences which are likely to have important functional rami1cations.

Data availability

Neuron morphologies presented in this paper have been deposited as interactive datasets in the InsectBrainDatabase with accession numbers EIN-0000061 (126nm data) and EIN-0000062 (24nm data). These are available for interactive viewing as well as download.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Marcel Ethan Sayre

    Vision Group, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
    For correspondence
    marcel.sayre@biol.lu.se
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Rachel Templin

    Queensland Brain Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Johanna Chavez

    Department of Biology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Julian Kempenaers

    Biology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0059-1045
  5. Stanley Heinze

    Biology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
    For correspondence
    stanley.heinze@biol.lu.se
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8145-3348

Funding

H2020 European Research Council (714599)

  • Stanley Heinze

Swedish Research Council (2018-04851 and 621-2012-2213)

  • Stanley Heinze

Australian Research Council

  • Rachel Templin

Australian Research Foundation

  • Rachel Templin

Air Force Office for Scientific Research

  • Rachel Templin

International Cotutelle Macquarie University Research Excellence Scholarship (iMQRES 2019060)

  • Marcel Ethan Sayre

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

Copyright

© 2021, Sayre 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

  • 3,460
    views
  • 453
    downloads
  • 54
    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. Marcel Ethan Sayre
  2. Rachel Templin
  3. Johanna Chavez
  4. Julian Kempenaers
  5. Stanley Heinze
(2021)
A projectome of the bumblebee central complex
eLife 10:e68911.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.68911

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.68911

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Matthew R Kleinman, David J Foster
    Research Article

    Sequenced reactivations of hippocampal neurons called replays, concomitant with sharp-wave ripples in the local field potential, are critical for the consolidation of episodic memory, but whether replays depend on the brain’s reward or novelty signals is unknown. Here, we combined chemogenetic silencing of dopamine neurons in ventral tegmental area (VTA) and simultaneous electrophysiological recordings in dorsal hippocampal CA1, in freely behaving male rats experiencing changes to reward magnitude and environmental novelty. Surprisingly, VTA silencing did not prevent ripple increases where reward was increased, but caused dramatic, aberrant ripple increases where reward was unchanged. These increases were associated with increased reverse-ordered replays. On familiar tracks this effect disappeared, and ripples tracked reward prediction error (RPE), indicating that non-VTA reward signals were sufficient to direct replay. Our results reveal a novel dependence of hippocampal replay on dopamine, and a role for a VTA-independent RPE signal that is reliable only in familiar environments.

    1. Neuroscience
    Shuo Zhang, Yan Tian ... Haiyan Wu
    Research Article

    Active inference integrates perception, decision-making, and learning into a united theoretical framework, providing an efficient way to trade off exploration and exploitation by minimizing (expected) free energy. In this study, we asked how the brain represents values and uncertainties (novelty and variability), and resolves these uncertainties under the active inference framework in the exploration-exploitation trade-off. Twenty-five participants performed a contextual two-armed bandit task, with electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings. By comparing the model evidence for active inference and reinforcement learning models of choice behavior, we show that active inference better explains human decision-making under novelty and variability, which entails exploration or information seeking. The EEG sensor-level results show that the activity in the frontal, central, and parietal regions is associated with novelty, while the activity in the frontal and central brain regions is associated with variability. The EEG source-level results indicate that the expected free energy is encoded in the frontal pole and middle frontal gyrus and uncertainties are encoded in different brain regions but with overlap. Our study dissociates the expected free energy and uncertainties in active inference theory and their neural correlates, speaking to the construct validity of active inference in characterizing cognitive processes of human decisions. It provides behavioral and neural evidence of active inference in decision processes and insights into the neural mechanism of human decisions under uncertainties.