Abstract

The theta rhythm, a quasi-periodic 4-10 Hz oscillation, is observed during memory processing in the hippocampus, with different phases of theta hypothesized to separate independent streams of information related to the encoding and recall of memories. At the cellular level, the discovery of hippocampal memory cells (engram neurons), as well as the modulation of memory recall through optogenetic activation of these cells, has provided evidence that certain memories are stored, in part, in a sparse ensemble of neurons in the hippocampus. In previous research, however, engram reactivation has been carried out using open loop stimulation at fixed frequencies; the relationship between engram neuron reactivation and ongoing network oscillations has not been taken into consideration. To address this concern, we implemented a closed-loop reactivation of engram neurons that enabled phase-specific stimulation relative to theta oscillations in the local field potential in CA1. Using this real-time approach, we tested the impact of activating dentate gyrus engram neurons during the peak (encoding phase) and trough (recall phase) of theta oscillations. Consistent with previously hypothesized functions of theta oscillations in memory function, we show that stimulating dentate gyrus engram neurons at the trough of theta is more effective in eliciting behavioral recall than either fixed frequency stimulation or stimulation at the peak of theta. Moreover, phase-specific trough stimulation is accompanied by an increase in the coupling between gamma and theta oscillations in CA1 hippocampus. Oure results provide a causal link between phase- specific activation of engram cells and the behavioral expression of memory.

Data availability

Data collected for the purpose of this paper and the custom algorithms that were used in performing the analysis are available at https://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.k0p2ngfc0. The theta-phase detection algorithm is accessible at https://github.com/ndlBU/phase_specific_stim. It can be run using the RTXI platform accessible through http://rtxi.org. Behavioral scoring was done using the ezTrack package available at github.com/DeniseCaiLab/ezTrack.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Bahar Rahsepar

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jacob F Norman

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jad Noueihed

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Benjamin Lahner

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Melanie H Quick

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Kevin Ghaemi

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Aashna Pandya

    Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Fernando R Fernandez

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Steve Ramirez

    Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Boston University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9966-598X
  10. John A White

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    jwhite@bu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1073-2638

Funding

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01 NS054281)

  • John A White

BU Center for Systems Neuroscience and Neurophotonics Center (Grant)

  • Bahar Rahsepar
  • Jacob F Norman
  • Jad Noueihed
  • Steve Ramirez
  • John A White

National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01 EB016407)

  • John A White

National Institutes of Health (DP5 OD023106-01)

  • Steve Ramirez

National Institutes of Health (Transformative R01)

  • Steve Ramirez

Ludwig Family Foundation (Research Grant)

  • Steve Ramirez

Brain and Behavior Research Foundation (Young Investigator Grant)

  • Steve Ramirez

McKnight Foundation (Memory and Cognitive Disorders Award)

  • Steve Ramirez

Pew Scholars Program in the Biomedical Science (Grant)

  • Steve Ramirez

Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550- 21-1-0310)

  • Steve Ramirez

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Laura L Colgin, University of Texas at Austin, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All of the animals were handled according to approved institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) protocols (PROTO201800599) of Boston University. The protocol was approved by the Committee on the Ethics of Animal Experiments of the University of Minnesota (Permit Number: 27-2956). All surgery was performed under sodium pentobarbital anesthesia, and every effort was made to minimize suffering.

Version history

  1. Received: August 14, 2022
  2. Preprint posted: October 28, 2022 (view preprint)
  3. Accepted: July 3, 2023
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: July 4, 2023 (version 1)
  5. Version of Record published: July 21, 2023 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2023, Rahsepar 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

  • 1,097
    views
  • 205
    downloads
  • 2
    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. Bahar Rahsepar
  2. Jacob F Norman
  3. Jad Noueihed
  4. Benjamin Lahner
  5. Melanie H Quick
  6. Kevin Ghaemi
  7. Aashna Pandya
  8. Fernando R Fernandez
  9. Steve Ramirez
  10. John A White
(2023)
Theta-phase-specific modulation of dentate gyrus memory neurons
eLife 12:e82697.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82697

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82697

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    MinHyuk Lee, Se Hoon Park ... KyeongJin Kang
    Research Article

    Establishing transepithelial ion disparities is crucial for sensory functions in animals. In insect sensory organs called sensilla, a transepithelial potential, known as the sensillum potential (SP), arises through active ion transport across accessory cells, sensitizing receptor neurons such as mechanoreceptors and chemoreceptors. Because multiple receptor neurons are often co-housed in a sensillum and share SP, niche-prevalent overstimulation of single sensory neurons can compromise neighboring receptors by depleting SP. However, how such potential depletion is prevented to maintain sensory homeostasis remains unknown. Here, we find that the Ih-encoded hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) channel bolsters the activity of bitter-sensing gustatory receptor neurons (bGRNs), albeit acting in sweet-sensing GRNs (sGRNs). For this task, HCN maintains SP despite prolonged sGRN stimulation induced by the diet mimicking their sweet feeding niche, such as overripe fruit. We present evidence that Ih-dependent demarcation of sGRN excitability is implemented to throttle SP consumption, which may have facilitated adaptation to a sweetness-dominated environment. Thus, HCN expressed in sGRNs serves as a key component of a simple yet versatile peripheral coding that regulates bitterness for optimal food intake in two contrasting ways: sweet-resilient preservation of bitter aversion and the previously reported sweet-dependent suppression of bitter taste.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Melody C Iacino, Taylor A Stowe ... Mark J Ferris
    Research Article Updated

    Adolescence is characterized by changes in reward-related behaviors, social behaviors, and decision-making. These behavioral changes are necessary for the transition into adulthood, but they also increase vulnerability to the development of a range of psychiatric disorders. Major reorganization of the dopamine system during adolescence is thought to underlie, in part, the associated behavioral changes and increased vulnerability. Here, we utilized fast scan cyclic voltammetry and microdialysis to examine differences in dopamine release as well as mechanisms that underlie differential dopamine signaling in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) core of adolescent (P28-35) and adult (P70-90) male rats. We show baseline differences between adult and adolescent-stimulated dopamine release in male rats, as well as opposite effects of the α6 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) on modulating dopamine release. The α6-selective blocker, α-conotoxin, increased dopamine release in early adolescent rats, but decreased dopamine release in rats beginning in middle adolescence and extending through adulthood. Strikingly, blockade of GABAA and GABAB receptors revealed that this α6-mediated increase in adolescent dopamine release requires NAc GABA signaling to occur. We confirm the role of α6 nAChRs and GABA in mediating this effect in vivo using microdialysis. Results herein suggest a multisynaptic mechanism potentially unique to the period of development that includes early adolescence, involving acetylcholine acting at α6-containing nAChRs to drive inhibitory GABA tone on dopamine release.