Using synchronized brain rhythms to bias memory-guided decisions

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

Information transfer between the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex is thought to be critical for spatial working memory, but most of the prior evidence for this hypothesis is correlational. This study attempts to test this causally by linking trial start times to theta-band coherence between these two structures. The authors find that trials initiated during periods of high coherence led to a dramatic improvement in performance. This applied not only to a spatial working memory task, but also to a cue-guided navigation task, suggesting that coherence in these regions may be a signature of a heightened attentional or preparatory state. The authors supplement this behavioral result with electrophysiological recordings to test whether the ventral midline thalamus is likely to mediate hippocampal-prefrontal coherence.

Strengths:

This study demonstrates a striking behavioral effect; by changing the moment at which a trial is initiated, performance on a spatial working memory task improves dramatically, from around 80% correct to over 90% correct. A smaller but nonetheless robust increase in accuracy was also seen in a texture discrimination task. Therefore, prefrontal-hippocampal synchronization in the theta band may not only be important for spatial navigation but may also be associated with improved performance in a range of tasks. If these results can be replicated using noninvasive EEG, it would open up a powerful avenue for modulating human behavior.

Weaknesses:

Ventral midline thalamic nuclei, such as reuniens, have reciprocal projections to both the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus and are therefore well-situated to mediate theta-band interactions between these structures. However, alternative mechanisms cannot be ruled out by the results of this study. For example, theta rhythms are globally coherent across the rodent hippocampus, and the ventral hippocampus projects directly to the prefrontal cortex. Theta propagation may depend on this pathway, and may only be passively inherited by VMT.

The optogenetic manipulations are intended to show that theta in VMT propagates to PFC and also affects HPC-PFC coherence. However, the "theta" induced by driving thalamic neurons at 7 Hz is extremely artificial. To demonstrate that VMT is causally involved in coordinating activity across HPC and PFC, it would have been better to optogenetically inhibit, rather than excite, these nuclei. If the authors were able to show that the natural occurrence of theta in PFC depends on activity in VMT, that would be a much more convincing test of their hypothesis.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

A number of previous reports have demonstrated that theta synchrony between the hippocampus (HPC) and prefrontal cortex (PFC) is associated with correct performance on spatial working memory tasks. The main goal of the current study is to examine this relationship by initiating trials either randomly (as is typically done) or during periods of high or low PFC-HPC coherence. To this end, they develop a 'brain-machine interface' (BMI) that provides real-time estimates of PFC-HPC theta coherence, which are then used to control trial onset using an automated figure-eight maze. Their main finding is that choice accuracy is significantly higher on trials initiated when theta coherence is high whereas performance on low coherence trials does not differ from randomly initiated control trials. They also observe a similar result using a non-working memory task in the same maze.

Overall the main experiments (Figures 1-4) are well designed and the BMI approach is convincingly validated. There are also appropriate controls and analyses to rule out behavioral confounds and the results clearly presented. The idea of triggering trial onset based on brain activity is an interesting idea and helps to examine how extremes in the distribution of brain states are associated with behavior, something that might be more difficult to examine if trials are initiated randomly. As such, the BMI is an interesting approach for studying the neuronal basis of behavior that could potentially be applied beyond the particular field of the study, something the authors could perhaps have elaborated on more.

That being said, although the authors have elegantly revealed an association between PFC-HPC theta synchrony and behavior using their BMI approach, it is not apparent whether these results add substantially to previous reports of similar associations, including from the author's own work. The authors sometimes seem to claim that they do; for example, in the discussion, after describing previous studies that reported an association between PFC-HPC theta synchrony and behavior, they raise the reasonable question "did mPFC-hippocampal theta coherence lead to, or coincide with, correct choice outcomes?" What they subsequently write gives the impression that their study has somehow addressed the question, whereas in fact their results still leave this question open. For example, it is entirely possible that during high-coherence trials an unobserved neural process is influencing both coherence and task performance. The authors could have made a more convincing case as to why their correlative results go beyond similar findings from previous studies, perhaps by including additional analysis to strengthen their case.

Sometimes, the authors also seem to suggest that their results establish a causal relationship between synchrony and behavior, for example when they say that they have "demonstrated for the first time that strong mPFC-hippocampal theta coherence ENHANCES memory-guided choice" (line 557, my emphasis). However, causal manipulations of PFC-HPC synchrony would be required to make such claims. I am not suggesting that the lack of such data is necessarily a weakness of the study, only that causal claims are not supported by the author's results.

In addition to the behavioral results described above, the authors also examine how HPC-PFC synchrony modulates synchrony with the ventromedial thalamus (VMT; Figure 5) and how optogenetic modulation of the VMT influences PFC-HPC synchrony (Figure 6). However, these results feel somewhat more preliminary and their relationship to the other findings in the manuscript is not always clear. For example, given that the authors demonstrate that "Prefrontal-hippocampal theta synchronization modulates prefrontal-thalamic interactions" (Figure 5) I would rather have expected the authors to manipulate HPC and/or PFC and see how this affects VMT in Figure 6. It is also difficult to draw strong conclusions about the effects of optogenetic VMT stimulation since the results presented by the authors come from only 2 rats (Figure 6D-K) and therefore feel somewhat anecdotal. I could also not find any statistical test supporting the increase in the proportion of phase-locked neurons during high theta states shown in Figure 5K.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Stout et al investigate the link between prefrontal-hippocampal (PFC-HPC) theta-band coherence and accurate decision-making in spatial decision-making tasks. Previous studies show that PFC-HPC theta coherence positively correlates with learning of these tasks and correct decisions but the nature of this relation relies on correlations that cannot show whether coherence leads, coincides, or is a consequence of decision making. To investigate more precisely this link, the authors devise a novel paradigm. In this paradigm, the rat is blocked during a delay period preceding its choice and they control on a trial-by-trial basis the level of PFC-HPC theta coherence prior to the decision by allowing the rat to access the choice point only at a time when coherence reaches above or below a threshold. The design of the paradigm is very nicely controlled thanks in particular to the trial-by-trial matching of delay period durations which is crucial for the working memory task. Moreover, the behaviour of the animal is strongly similar during high and low coherence periods which bolsters the specificity of the author's interpretation. Thanks to this approach, the authors clearly demonstrate that high theta coherence prior to choice-making is strongly predictive of better decision-making both in working memory and a cue-guided version of the task.

This novel paradigm provides an improvement in the level of experimental control to analyse the coherence/choice link but the exact interpretation of the results it yields is not entirely clear in the current manuscript. Using the PFC-HPC theta coherence during the delay period to the gate when the rat accesses the choice zone clearly separates this coherence from the behavioural decision itself. This provides convincing support for the idea that PFC-HPC theta coherence prior to the behavioural decision is related to correct decision-making and is not simply temporally coincidental or a consequence of the decision output. It does not however substantially increase the weight of evidence in favour of a causal link between theta coherence and correct decisions as suggested in the abstract ("PFC-HPC theta synchronization leads to correct choices"). Indeed, the paradigm does not de-correlate PFC-HPC theta synchronization from other neurophysiological variables such as neuromodulation, arousal, synchrony with other areas, etc that could be playing the true causal role in modulating decision-making.

The question of the link between the manuscript's findings and causal involvement of PFC-HPC dialogue is interestingly highlighted by the author's unexpected result showing that their paradigm reveals a link between theta coherence even in a sensory-driven version of the task. As the authors point out, results based on muscimol inhibition have shown that neither PFC nor HPC, nor the ventral midline thalamus, that mediates communication between the two, are involved in this task. This raises the question of why coherence between two areas is predictive of choice accuracy when neither area appears to be causally involved. The manuscript does not discuss the possibility that these results could imply that theta coherence is not in fact a good causal indicator. As an illustrative example, it could be linked for example with neuromodulation (ie dopamine, see Benchenane et al, 2010) which itself causally modifies the choice process. In this case, coherence would be an excellent predictor of accuracy (as the authors show) without implying a causally important information exchange between the two regions, since inhibiting these regions is without effect.

Altogether, this novel paradigm provides finer control to analyse the role of theta coherence in behaviour. This allows pinpointing of interesting cases in which coherence increases during correct task performance although it may have at least an indirect causal role. This opens up the possibility of interrogating when inter-area synchrony is associated with information transfer and when this information is then used to drive behavioural decisions.