Intrinsic and circuit mechanisms of predictive coding in a grid cell network model

Reviewer #1 (Public review):

Summary:

In this manuscript, the authors aim to elucidate the mechanisms by which grid cells in the medial entorhinal cortex generate predictive representations of spatial location. To address this, they built a computational model integrating intrinsic neuronal dynamics with structured network connectivity. Specifically, they combine a conductance-based single-cell model incorporating biologically realistic HCN channels with a continuous attractor network that reflects known properties of grid cell circuitry. Their simulations show that HCN conductance can shift grid fields forward by approximately 5% of their diameter, consistent with experimental observations in layer II grid cells. Additionally, by introducing asymmetry in the connectivity of interneurons, the model produces larger forward shifts, which parallel properties observed in layer III grid cells. Together, these two mechanisms provide a unified framework for explaining layer-specific predictive coding in the entorhinal cortex.

Strengths:

A major strength of the study lies in its conceptual contribution. The authors propose two distinct mechanisms to generate forward-shifted grid fields for predictive coding. One mechanism is intrinsic and depends on the time constants associated with HCN channels. The other is network-based and results from asymmetries in interneuron connectivity. These two mechanisms correspond to different observed properties of grid cells in layer II and layer III, respectively. The modeling is based on previously validated frameworks of continuous attractor network models (e.g., Burak & Fiete; Kang & DeWeese), but it incorporates several novel features, including the incorporation of biophysically realistic HCN channels, a network architecture that excludes stellate-stellate connections and relies on interneurons, and asymmetric interneuron connectivity.

Weaknesses:

One of the proposed mechanisms for predictive coding, namely asymmetric interneuron connectivity, is a novel idea. However, this type of connectivity has not yet been demonstrated experimentally in the medial entorhinal cortex. Therefore, the biological plausibility of this mechanism remains uncertain and will need to be evaluated in future empirical studies.

Reviewer #2 (Public review):

Summary:

This study proposes that predictive spatial representations in medial entorhinal cortex (MEC) grid cells arise through two distinct biophysical mechanisms: (1) HCN conductance-dependent temporal dynamics, which generate modest forward shifts (~5% of grid field diameter) in Layer II cells, and (2) network asymmetry, enabling larger predictive shifts (~25% of grid field diameter) in Layer III cells. The model further predicts a dorsoventral gradient in predictive coding magnitude, correlating with observed HCN conductance variations. These results provide a mechanistic framework for understanding how intrinsic cellular properties and circuit architecture collectively enable prospective spatial coding in the MEC. This is an important study.

Strengths:

These findings reveal how cellular properties and circuit design enable prospective spatial coding. This novel, impactful study will be of interest to the field.

Weaknesses:

Some of the models are too mathematical and do not fit with the biological observation.

Reviewer #3 (Public review):

Summary:

The manuscript by Shaikh and Assisi addresses a timely and important question related to the neural circuit mechanisms underlying spatial representations during navigation. Concretely, they present a model of the medial entorhinal cortex (MEC) with biophysically detailed conductance-based stellate cells that can perform path integration and reveal two potential mechanisms underlying two forms of predictive coding by grid cells in the MEC. One mechanism uses HCN channels to explain predictive coding in MEC layer II grid cells equivalent to ~5% of the diameter of a grid field, and the other uses asymmetric connections between interneurons and stellate cells, resulting in a ~25% predictive bias of layer III grid cells. The methods and model are technically sound, and the model is expected to be useful for computational neuroscientists studying the neural mechanisms of spatial navigation.

Strengths:

One strength of the model is its use of conductance-based neuron models of stellate cells and interneurons, adding important biophysical constraints and details to existing continuous attractor network models of grid cells. The model fills a gap in the literature by providing mechanisms for predictive coding constrained by biophysical properties of stellate cells and simplified network topology.

Weaknesses:

A weakness of the model is that the neural network is relatively small (five sheets with 71 × 71 neurons each), and the 2-D toroidal topology is further simplified to a 1-D ring attractor consisting of three rings with 192 neurons each. The model incorporates biophysical detail at the single-neuron level, but not at the network level. For example, it includes only stellate cells and a generic interneuron type, and does not implement data-driven connectivity patterns.

The restricted network size and the limited experimental knowledge about connectivity among stellate cells, principal cells, and different interneuron types in the MEC could be addressed in more detail. Moreover, the manuscript lacks a thorough discussion of assumptions common to most continuous attractor network (CAN) models of grid cells, such as the use of "hand-crafted" connections between direction-sensitive conjunctive grid cells and network cells to drive attractor shifts. Including such a discussion would strengthen the manuscript. This is especially relevant given the authors' explicit claim that they have revealed two mechanisms underlying the emergence of a predictive code in the MEC. In this reviewer's view, the work demonstrates a potential mechanism, but one that requires experimental verification. The significance of the model would thus be increased by providing more experimentally testable predictions of the model.