Genetic Dissection of Neural Circuits

Department of Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Neuron (Impact Factor: 15.05). 04/2008; 57(5):634-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.01.002
Source: PubMed


Understanding the principles of information processing in neural circuits requires systematic characterization of the participating cell types and their connections, and the ability to measure and perturb their activity. Genetic approaches promise to bring experimental access to complex neural systems, including genetic stalwarts such as the fly and mouse, but also to nongenetic systems such as primates. Together with anatomical and physiological methods, cell-type-specific expression of protein markers and sensors and transducers will be critical to construct circuit diagrams and to measure the activity of genetically defined neurons. Inactivation and activation of genetically defined cell types will establish causal relationships between activity in specific groups of neurons, circuit function, and animal behavior. Genetic analysis thus promises to reveal the logic of the neural circuits in complex brains that guide behaviors. Here we review progress in the genetic analysis of neural circuits and discuss directions for future research and development.

21 Reads
  • Source
    • "Therefore, achieving refined circuits remains a common challenge and goal for both vertebrate and invertebrate neuroscientists. The encouraging news is the unprecedented rapid advents in modern in vivo genetic and molecular techniques for fine mapping of neural circuits (Luo et al. 2008; Simpson 2009; White and Peabody 2009; Fore and Zhang 2013). In this review, we will discuss currently available tools for studying the structure and function of the nervous system, with a focus on intersectional strategies in Drosophila melanogaster. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Understanding behavior requires unraveling the mysteries of neurons, glia, and their extensive connectivity. Drosophila has emerged as an excellent organism for studying the neural basis of behavior. This can be largely attributed to the extensive effort of the fly community to develop numerous sophisticated genetic tools for visualizing, mapping, and manipulating behavioral circuits. Here, we attempt to highlight some of the new reagents, techniques and approaches available for dissecting behavioral circuits in Drosophila. We focus on detailing intersectional strategies such as the Flippase-induced intersectional Gal80/Gal4 repression (FINGR), because of the tremendous potential they possess for mapping the minimal number of cells required for a particular behavior. The logic and strategies outlined in this review should have broad applications for other genetic model organisms.
    Journal of Comparative Physiology 04/2015; 201(9). DOI:10.1007/s00359-015-1010-y · 2.04 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Recapitulating endogenous gene expression is key to cell typespecific study (Luo et al., 2008) and can be achieved by standard , bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) (Heintz, 2001; Ting and Feng, 2014), and site-directed transgenic methods. Standard and BAC transgenic methods both rely on random integration , which may help to study interneuron subpopulations that express the same cis-regulatory elements. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The evolution of genetically targeted tools has begun to allow us to dissect anatomically and functionally heterogeneous interneurons, and to probe circuit function from synapses to behavior. Over the last decade, these tools have been used widely to visualize neurons in a cell type-specific manner, and engage them to activate and inactivate with exquisite precision. In this process, we have expanded our understanding of interneuron diversity, their functional connectivity, and how selective inhibitory circuits contribute to behavior. Here we discuss the relative assets of genetically encoded fluorescent proteins (FPs), viral tracing methods, optogenetics, chemical genetics, and biosensors in the study of inhibitory interneurons and their respective circuits.
    Frontiers in Neural Circuits 10/2014; 8:124. DOI:10.3389/fncir.2014.00124 · 3.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "For the vertebrate species, there are mice models for studying motor axon regeneration and muscle reinnervation [25] and zebrafish models for studying brain disorders [26]. Another obvious advantage of setting experiments with animal models is the possibility of using a rich set of genetic tools for targeting specific neurons and manipulating neuron functions [27]. The recent development of optogenetics especially has allowed us to control neural activities more precisely than ever before. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Successful neurological rehabilitation depends on accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and quantitative evaluation. Neural coding, a technology for interpretation of functional and structural information of the nervous system, has contributed to the advancements in neuroimaging, brain-machine interface (BMI), and design of training devices for rehabilitation purposes. In this review, we summarized the latest breakthroughs in neuroimaging from microscale to macroscale levels with potential diagnostic applications for rehabilitation. We also reviewed the achievements in electrocorticography (ECoG) coding with both animal models and human beings for BMI design, electromyography (EMG) interpretation for interaction with external robotic systems, and robot-assisted quantitative evaluation on the progress of rehabilitation programs. Future rehabilitation would be more home-based, automatic, and self-served by patients. Further investigations and breakthroughs are mainly needed in aspects of improving the computational efficiency in neuroimaging and multichannel ECoG by selection of localized neuroinformatics, validation of the effectiveness in BMI guided rehabilitation programs, and simplification of the system operation in training devices.
    BioMed Research International 09/2014; 2014. DOI:10.1155/2014/286505 · 2.71 Impact Factor
Show more

Preview (2 Sources)

21 Reads
Available from