Learning accurate path integration in ring attractor models of the head direction system
Abstract
Ring attractor models for angular path integration have received strong experimental support. To function as integrators, head direction circuits require precisely tuned connectivity, but it is currently unknown how such tuning could be achieved. Here, we propose a network model in which a local, biologically plausible learning rule adjusts synaptic efficacies during development, guided by supervisory allothetic cues. Applied to the Drosophila head direction system, the model learns to path-integrate accurately and develops a connectivity strikingly similar to the one reported in experiments. The mature network is a quasi-continuous attractor and reproduces key experiments in which optogenetic stimulation controls the internal representation of heading, and where the network remaps to integrate with different gains in rodents. Our model predicts that path integration requires self-supervised learning during a developmental phase, and proposes a general framework to learn to path-integrate with gain-1 even in architectures that lack the physical topography of a ring.
Data availability
All code used in this work is available at https://github.com/panvaf/LearnPI. The files required to reproduce the figures can be found at https://gin.g-node.org/pavaf/LearnPI.
-
A Connectome of the Adult Drosophila Central BrainneuPrint https://neuprint.janelia.org/.
Article and author information
Author details
Funding
German Research Foundation (SFB 1315 - project-ID 327654276)
- David Owald
- Richard Kempter
Emmy Noether Programme (282979116)
- David Owald
German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (01GQ1705)
- Richard Kempter
Onassis Foundation Scholarship
- Pantelis Vafidis
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Reviewing Editor
- Srdjan Ostojic, Ecole Normale Superieure Paris, France
Version history
- Preprint posted: March 12, 2021 (view preprint)
- Received: April 28, 2021
- Accepted: June 17, 2022
- Accepted Manuscript published: June 20, 2022 (version 1)
- Version of Record published: July 15, 2022 (version 2)
Copyright
© 2022, Vafidis 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
-
- 2,042
- Page views
-
- 397
- Downloads
-
- 3
- Citations
Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.
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
-
- Chromosomes and Gene Expression
- Neuroscience
Mathys et al. conducted the first single-nucleus RNA-seq (snRNA-seq) study of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) (Mathys et al., 2019). With bulk RNA-seq, changes in gene expression across cell types can be lost, potentially masking the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) across different cell types. Through the use of single-cell techniques, the authors benefitted from increased resolution with the potential to uncover cell type-specific DEGs in AD for the first time. However, there were limitations in both their data processing and quality control and their differential expression analysis. Here, we correct these issues and use best-practice approaches to snRNA-seq differential expression, resulting in 549 times fewer DEGs at a false discovery rate of 0.05. Thus, this study highlights the impact of quality control and differential analysis methods on the discovery of disease-associated genes and aims to refocus the AD research field away from spuriously identified genes.
-
- Neuroscience
The strength of a fear memory significantly influences whether it drives adaptive or maladaptive behavior in the future. Yet, how mild and strong fear memories differ in underlying biology is not well understood. We hypothesized that this distinction may not be exclusively the result of changes within specific brain regions, but rather the outcome of collective changes in connectivity across multiple regions within the neural network. To test this, rats were fear conditioned in protocols of varying intensities to generate mild or strong memories. Neuronal activation driven by recall was measured using c-fos immunohistochemistry in 12 brain regions implicated in fear learning and memory. The interregional coordinated brain activity was computed and graph-based functional networks were generated to compare how mild and strong fear memories differ at the systems level. Our results show that mild fear recall is supported by a well-connected brain network with small-world properties in which the amygdala is well-positioned to be modulated by other regions. In contrast, this connectivity is disrupted in strong fear memories and the amygdala is isolated from other regions. These findings indicate that the neural systems underlying mild and strong fear memories differ, with implications for understanding and treating disorders of fear dysregulation.