ThermoMaze: A behavioral paradigm for readout of immobility-related brain events

  1. Neuroscience Institute, School of Medicine, New York University, New York, NY 10016, USA
  2. Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, New York University, New York, NY 10016, USA

Peer review process

Not revised: This Reviewed Preprint includes the authors’ original preprint (without revision), an eLife assessment, public reviews, and a response from the authors (if available).

Read more about eLife’s peer review process.

Editors

  • Reviewing Editor
    Emilio Kropff
    Fundación Instituto Leloir, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Senior Editor
    Kate Wassum
    University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States of America

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:
This manuscript introduced a new behavioral apparatus to regulate the animal's behavioral state naturally. It is a thermal maze where different sectors of the maze can be set to different temperatures; once the rest area of the animal is cooled down, it will start searching for a warmer alternative region to settle down again. They recorded with silicon probes from the hippocampus in the maze and found that the incidence of SWRs was higher at the rest areas and place cells representing a rest area were preferentially active during rest-SWRs as well but not during non-REM sleep.

Strengths:
The maze can have many future applications, e.g., see how the duration of waking immobility can influence learning, future memory recall, or sleep reactivation. It represents an out-of-the-box thinking to study and control less-studies aspects of the animals' behavior.

Weaknesses:
The impact is only within behavioral research and hippocampal electrophysiology.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:
In this manuscript, Vöröslakos and colleagues describe a new behavioural testing apparatus called ThermoMaze, which should facilitate controlling when a mouse is exploring the environment vs. remaining immobile. The floor of the apparatus is tiled with 25 plates, which can be individually heated, whereas the rest of the environment is cooled. The mouse avoids cooled areas and stays immobile on a heated tile. The authors systematically changed the location of the heated tile to trigger the mouse's exploratory behaviours. The authors showed that if the same plate stays heated longer, the mouse falls into an NREM sleep state. The authors conclude their apparatus allows easy control of triggering behaviours such as running/exploration, immobility and NREM sleep. The authors also carried out single-unit recordings of CA1 hippocampal cells using various silicone probes. They show that the location of a mouse can be decoded with above-chance accuracy from cell activity during sharp wave ripples, which tend to occur when the mouse is immobile or asleep. The authors suggest that consistent with some previous results, SPW-Rs encode the mouse's current location and any other information they may encode (such as past and future locations, usually associated with them).

Strengths:
Overall, the apparatus may open fruitful avenues for future research to uncover the physiology of transitions from different behavioural states such as locomotion, immobility, and sleep. The setup is compatible with neural recordings. No training is required.

Weaknesses:
I have a few concerns related to the authors' methodology and some limitations of the apparatus's current form. Although the authors suggest that switching between the plates forces animal behaviour into an exploratory mode, leading to a better sampling of the enclosure, their example position heat maps and trajectories suggest that the behaviour is still very stereotypical, restricted mostly to the trajectories along the walls or the diagonal ones (between two opposite corners). This may not be ideal for studying spatial responses known to be affected by the stereotypicity of the animal's trajectories. Moreover, given such stereotypicity of the trajectories mice take before and after reaching a specific plate, it may be that the stable activity of SWR-P ripples used for decoding different quadrants may be representing future and/or past trajectories rather than the current locations suggested by the authors. If this is the case, it may be confusing/misleading to call such activity ' place-selective firing', since they don't necessarily encode a given place per se (line 281).

Another main study limitation is the reported instability of the location cells in the Thermomaze. This may be related to the heating procedure, differences in stereotypical sampling of the enclosure, or the enclosure size (too small to properly reveal the place code). It would be helpful if the authors separate pyramidal cells into place and non-place cells to better understand how stable place cell activity is. This information may also help to disambiguate the SPW-R-related limitations outlined above and may help to solve the poor decoding problem reported by the authors (lines 218-221).

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  4. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation