Eatai Roth’s research while affiliated with University of Washington and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (11)


Fig. 1. (A) A two-part robotically actuated artificial flower provides independent control of visual and mechanical stimuli. The flower facade furnishes a moving visual stimulus, r v ðtÞ. Accessible through a narrow slit in the facade, the proboscis dips into an independently actuated nectar spur (painted black to minimize its visual salience). As the nectar spur moves, r m ðtÞ, it deflects the proboscis. In sensory conflict experiments, the position of the moth, yðtÞ, is directed by both visual and mechanosensory cues imposed by the flower facade, r v ðtÞ, and nectary, r m ðtÞ. (B) A simplified block diagram illustrates the parallel pathways that underlie the tracking behavior. Each block represents a transformation from of a neural or mechanical signal. Because moths are freely flying in experiments, the block diagram is closed loop; the moth perceives its relative motion (the difference between the motion stimulus and its own trajectory) with respect to the facade and nectary: the signals e v ðtÞ and e m ðtÞ, respectively. The forward cascade of transformations from the error signals, e v ðtÞ and e m ðtÞ, to the motion output yðtÞ is referred to as the sensorimotor transforms (open loop). The closed-loop transformation from exogenous motion, r v ðtÞ and r m ðtÞ, to motion output is referred to as the behavioral transform. 
Fig. 2. Tracking performance of moths following fictive flowers under three motion stimulus conditions: (A) the flower face and nectary move through identical trajectories, r m ðtÞ = r v ðtÞ (green; the coupled condition; mean and 95% confidence; n = 8), (B) the nectary oscillates while the flower face is stationary, r v ðtÞ = 0 (blue; the M-only condition; n = 8), and the nectary is stationary, r m = 0 (gold; the V-only condition; n = 8), while the flower face oscillates. (A, i and B, i) Time traces of tracking trials show slightly deprecated tracking in response to only nectary motion and severely impaired tracking when the flower face provides the motion stimulus. (A, ii and B, ii) The magnitude of the Fourier transform of the moth's trajectory compared with the motion stimulus reveals that, for all conditions, the moth attends to the moving target; the spectra of moth positions show spikes in power at those frequencies that compose the input motion stimulus. (C, i) For the coupled condition, the visual and mechanosensory slips (green) are equivalent and therefore, can be simultaneously minimized. (D and E) For the M-and V-only conditions, respectively, the errors e v ðtÞ (gold) and e m ðtÞ (blue) reflect a balance of competing sensory pathways. The similarity in error signals between the two conflict conditions is notable considering the categorical differences in stimulus presentation and moth response. w.r.t., with respect to. 
Fig. 3. Bode plots represent graphically the transfer function in terms of two quantities, gain and phase, both as a function of frequency. (Upper) Gain is defined as the relative amplitude of the output with respect to the input for the specified frequency component, jHðωÞj; (Lower) phase is the relative timing of the output and input signals, ∠HðωÞ. Hence, perfect tracking would correspond to unity gain and zero phase (i.e., moth and flower motions are at the same amplitude and synchronized). For a multiinput, single-output system, the transfer function relating the output to an input describes the system response assuming that all other inputs are zero just as we have done experimentally. (A) Over the behaviorally relevant frequency band, 0-1.7 Hz (4), the response in the M-only condition (blue; mean and 95% confidence) is characterized by slight attenuation in gain and increased phase lag. In the V-only condition (gold), gain is severely attenuated, even at the lowest frequencies, but phase is leading. (B) In response to flower motion with coherent visual and mechanosensory cues, moths track with high fidelity at low frequencies characterized by near-unity gain and small phase lags. The sum of the complex-valued transfer functions is superimposed on the coherent response (brown dashed line). The linear sum of M-and V-only responses qualitatively predicts the measured response to coherent stimuli over the entire frequency range tested. (C) Assuming linear summation between sensory pathways, we may predict the behavioral response to hypothetical isolation experiments in which one or the other sensory pathway is inhibited or ablated. These data are presented in Tables S1 and S2. 
Fig. 4. (A) Specially designed nectary (blue) and flower facade (gold) trajectories should elicit largely destructive motor contributions, in which all frequency components are annihilated except a selected frequency: 0.7 Hz for this case. Note that the amplitude of the visual stimulus is significantly higher to account for the lower gain of the visual pathway in this frequency band. The model predicts (B) the contribution from each sensorimotor pathway (blue and gold dashed lines) as well as (C) their linear summation (red dashed lines). Although we design inputs that would yield a purely sinusoidal moth response, small errors in generating input trajectories result in a slightly imperfect sinusoid prediction. The predicted response represents the empirically measured inputs filtered through the associated behavioral transform functions. (D) Empirical results (n = 5) recreate the model prediction. This experiment is repeated with the constructive frequency at 1.9 Hz (Fig. S2). 
Fig. S1. (A) The behavior transfer function HðωÞ is a complex-valued function of frequency. At each frequency, the transfer function prescribes a gain, the ratio of output and input amplitudes, and a phase, the relative timing of the output sinusoid with respect to the input as an angular difference (measured in degrees or radians). On the complex plane, gain and phase are represented as the magnitude and angle (with respect to the positive real axis) of this vector. Perfect tracking occurs at the point 1 + j · 0, the point where gain is unity and phase is zero, which is denoted by the bullseye. (B) The normalized tracking error with respect to the motion stimulus is the magnitude of the difference between perfect tracking and the behavioral response (that is, the gain of the error signal; shown in cyan). The tracking error with respect to the motionless stimulus is simply the magnitude of the behavioral response (green). (C) As the behavioral response decays (as H, H v , and H m all do at high frequency), the tracking errors with respect to the moving and stationary stimuli approach one and zero, respectively. This condition serves as a baseline case, and deviations from this condition evidence a control policy favoring one sensory modality over another (Fig. 2 D, ii and E, ii). w.r.t., with respect to. 

+1

Integration of parallel mechanosensory and visual pathways resolved through sensory conflict
  • Article
  • Full-text available

October 2016

·

202 Reads

·

54 Citations

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Eatai Roth

·

·

Thomas L Daniel

·

Significance Animals rely on information drawn from a host of sensory systems to control their movement as they navigate in and interact with their environment. How the nervous system consolidates and processes these channels of information to govern locomotion is a challenging reverse engineering problem. To address this issue, we asked how a hawkmoth feeding from a moving flower combines visual and mechanical (force) cues to follow the flower motion. Using experimental and theoretical approaches, we discover that the brain performs a remarkably simple summation of information from visual and mechanosensory pathways. Moreover, we reveal that the moth could perform the behavior with either visual or mechanical information alone, and this redundancy provides a robust strategy for movement control.

Download


Fig. 1. Simultaneous neuronal and behavioral recordings. ( A ) Schematic of the setup for whole-cell patch-clamp recordings during flight. ( B ) Maximal in- tensity projection of the Gal4 line R27B03 crossed to UAS-eGFP showing the dendrites of three labeled HS cells of one lobula plate (approximately 30 μ m in depth) in green. Neuropil staining shown in purple. (Scale bar: 50 μ m.) ( C ) Example traces obtained from one fly. Periods of closed-loop stripe fixation are interspersed with 3 s of open-loop stimulus presentation (shaded gray areas), when a square wave pattern drifts horizontally in the cell ’ s preferred direction (PD) (here at 0.5 Hz temporal frequency). The traces indicate the optomotor behavior measured as difference between wing stroke amplitudes (L-R), the membrane potential (V) of an HS cell recorded simultaneously, and the response of the same HS cell to a similar stimulus during quiescence. HS cells de- polarize in response to PD motion and hyperpolarize in response to null direction (ND) motion (Fig. S1). The motor output shows a similar directional dependence. Rightward stimulus motion elicits increases in L-R, corresponding to a right turn. During the closed-loop portion of the flight trials, the cells responded robustly to the horizontal motion of the stripe. Flies occasionally perform fast turns in the opposite direction of stimulus motion. These internally generated turns coincide with brief changes in the membrane potential of HS cells (purple arrowheads). ( D ) Mean and SEM (gray envelopes) of behavioral (L-R, green) and neuronal responses during flight (blue) and quiescence (black) of 11 flies for temporal frequencies of 2 and 7 Hz. Light gray areas indicate time of stimulus motion. ( E ) Mean and SEM of steady-state HS cell responses during quiescence (black) and flight (blue) and of behavioral responses (green), calculated during the second second of open-loop stimulus presentation. ND responses (Fig. S1) were subtracted from PD responses. 
Fig. 2. HS cell and behavioral impulse responses. ( A ) Example trace of an m- sequence experiment. An m-sequence controls the instantaneous horizontal velocity of a large field sine grating. + 1 ( − 1) indicates that the stimulus was moving in the PD (ND) of the cell. The change in membrane potential (V) of one HS cell and the turning response (L-R) elicited by this stimulus are shown below. ( B ) Mean neuronal (blue, n = 5) and behavioral (green, n = 4) impulse responses obtained from m-sequence data. SEM is indicated in gray. Behavioral data were obtained from intact flies by using a longer m-sequence than for neuronal data. The red line is the transfer function (TF) between the two responses. 
Fig. 3. Behavioral and HS cell responses to motion stimuli of variable duration. (A) Mean behavioral responses of 15 intact wild-type flies to a largefield pattern rotating in the PD for a variable length of time (from 0 to 2 s, indicated by the horizontal bars above) and then remaining stationary for 3 s. Before the stimulus, flies performed closed-loop stripe fixation. (B) Mean membrane potential (V) of HS cells during flight in eight flies in response to the same stimuli. (C) Prediction of the fluorescence signal based on reported time constants of GCaMP6f estimated by convolving baseline-subtracted neuronal responses in B with the kernel shown in G. Predictions were normalized to the peak response of the shortest duration trial. (D) Measured GCaMP6f fluorescence changes (ΔF/F) in the terminals of HS cells of 21 flies during flight in response to similar stimuli as in A and B. (E) Mean and SEM of behavioral responses (green solid line) and peak predicted (dotted lines) and measured (solid lines) fluorescence changes during flight (blue) and quiescence (black) from A, C, D, H, and I plotted against stimulus duration. The baseline (mean during 0.5 s before open-loop stimulus) was subtracted from the measured GCaMP6f responses. (F, H, and I) Same as B-D, but during quiescence. (G) Kernel for predicting fluorescence changes purely based on GCaMP6f dynamics. Time constants for rise and decay (τ 0.5 ) are 50 and 490 ms, respectively, and were chosen to match the prediction to the time course of the imaging data for the shortest duration stimulus (0.1 s) in D.
Fig. 4. T4 and T5 cell responses to stimuli of varying durations similar to Fig. 3. (A) Mean image of T4 and T5 cell terminals in the lobula plate obtained during recording from one fly with the region of interest circled in red and the background in green. In this image, medial would be on the top, lateral on the bottom, dorsal to the right, and ventral to the left. The region of interest was chosen to match the layer of HS cell dendrites, which is the deepest layer (in this view most medial) next to the lobula, where T5 cells have their dendrites. (B) Fluorescence changes in the HS cell layer during quiescence (lower traces) and flight (upper traces) of 10 flies. The grating was held stationary in between trials and started moving at time 0 for the time indicated by the colored bars on top of the graph.
Cellular mechanisms for integral feedback in visually guided behavior

March 2014

·

201 Reads

·

63 Citations

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

·

·

Eatai Roth

·

[...]

·

Michael H Dickinson

Significance Visually driven behaviors of Drosophila have become a model system to study how neural circuits process sensory information. Here, we show that one of the computations performed by this system is temporal integration of visual motion. We provide evidence of how this computation might be performed by measuring the activity of identified visual interneurons during tethered flight that are thought to control the described behavior: Presynaptic calcium accumulation in these neurons mimics a leaky temporal integration of the visual motion signal as does the behavior. In the future, the genetic tools available in Drosophila will enable studying the precise mechanism of temporal integration in this model system, which could provide insights into general mechanisms of neuronal information processing.


Figure 2: (A) Schematic depicting a cockroach following a wall and (B) a simplified block diagram representation of cockroach wall-following behavior. The reference signal is the position of the wall in some global reference, r ( t ). The difference between the wall and the cockroach’s position, y ( t ), is the error signal, e ( t ). The error is encoded in antennal mechanoreceptors and transformed by the nervous system, ultimately causing changes in motor commands that act through the animals body dynamics to alter its own position, thereby regulating this feedback error to a desired reference point. 
Figure 3: (A) The knifefish in a moving shuttle. Positions are measured from a fixed reference frame to tracking points on the refuge and the animal body. (B) A schematic depicting the counter-propagating wave kinematics of the knifefish ribbon fin. As ambient flow velocity, u , increases, fish recruit a larger portion of the fin for L head , the wave component responsible 
Figure 4: (A) Experimental setup for measuring responses to visual pitch perturbations in M. sexta . The moth is attached to a rigid tether and placed in a cylindrical LED arena. During bouts of flight the moth is presented with either an isolated visual stimulus, r 1 ( t ), by rotating a green and black striped pattern on the visual display, an isolated mechanical stimulus, 
Figure 5: (A) Experimental setup to identify the JAR in Eigenmannia . The fish is placed in a tube in the experimental tank, and recording electrodes (red) are used to measure its EOD. The EOD is amplified and its frequency is extracted. This frequency is fed to the controller which generates the appropriate input frequency based on a control law. A signal generator outputs a sinusoid at the input frequency, which is then played into the tank through the stimulus electrodes (black), through a stimulus isolation unit (SIU). (B) Block diagram representation of the same experimental paradigm. The reference, r ( t ), output, y ( t ), input, u ( t ), and dF , d ( t ), are all frequency signals relative to the baseline frequency of the fish. We seek to identify the unstable open loop (green dashed box) using the stabilized closed loop (orange dashed box). The dF computation is modeled to have a lumped delay. The delayed difference initiates the sensory escape, which competes with the motor return to produce the output EOD frequency. 
Feedback Control as a Framework for Understanding Tradeoffs in Biology

February 2014

·

316 Reads

·

114 Citations

Integrative and Comparative Biology

Control theory arose from a need to control synthetic systems. From regulating steam engines to tuning radios to devices capable of autonomous movement, it provided a formal mathematical basis for understanding the role of feedback in the stability (or change) of dynamical systems. It provides a framework for understanding any system with feedback regulation, including biological ones such as regulatory gene networks, cellular metabolic systems, sensorimotor dynamics of moving animals, and even ecological or evolutionary dynamics of organisms and populations. Here we focus on four case studies of the sensorimotor dynamics of animals, each of which involves the application of principles from control theory to probe stability and feedback in an organism's response to perturbations. We use examples from aquatic (electric fish station keeping and jamming avoidance), terrestrial (cockroach wall following) and aerial environments (flight control in moths) to highlight how one can use control theory to understand how feedback mechanisms interact with the physical dynamics of animals to determine their stability and response to sensory inputs and perturbations. Each case study is cast as a control problem with sensory input, neural processing, and motor dynamics, the output of which feeds back to the sensory inputs. Collectively, the interaction of these systems in a closed loop determines the behavior of the entire system.


Fig. 5. Comparison of tracking performance using two different control strategies. (A-I and B-I) Control signals (blue, red, orange, and green) for counterpropagating waves ðΔLÞ and a single traveling wave (f) are shown for four different reference trajectory amplitudes (A = 1 cm, 2 cm, 5 cm, and 7 cm, respectively). (A-II and B-II) Biomimetic robot positions (same color scheme) closely track the reference trajectories (black). (C) Ratio of the rms of the commanded control signals ðfrms : ΔLrmsÞ depends on the reference trajectory amplitude. The model predicts that this rms ratio tends to infinity as the reference amplitude, A, goes to zero, strongly favoring counterpropagating waves when the goal is stable hovering ðA ≈ 0Þ. Predicted and measured ratios for the robot closely match each other. Predicted ratios for Eigenmannia are based on traveling wave kinematics obtained during hovering (U = 0 cm/s). Uncertainty bars represent variability in kinematics of different subjects.
Fig. S5. Force measurements from the robotic setup (nodal point shift gain). ( A ) For a constant angular amplitude ð θ = 30 8 Þ , forces generated by robotic fi n are shown for different frequencies. ( B ) For a constant frequency ( f = 3 Hz), forces generated by robotic fi n are shown for different angular amplitudes. ( C ) Nodal shift gains computed from a linear fi t to the results shown in A are depicted as a function of frequency. κ varies nonlinearly as a function of f . ( D ) Computational results. Measured kinematics of fi sh 4 from three replicates of the data during hovering (no ambient fl ow) are used as inputs for the computational model. Computed forces as a function of nodal shift ð Δ L Þ are shown. The three colors (red, green, and blue) correspond to three replicates (sets) of data. Forces generated by the head wave ( + ), forces generated by the tail wave (x), and the net force produced by the two waves ( fi lled circles) are shown. 
Fig. S6. Force measurements from the robotic setup (damping constant). ( A ) For a constant angular amplitude ð θ = 20 8 Þ , forces acting on the robotic fi n are shown for different frequencies. ( B ) For a constant frequency ( f = 3 Hz), forces acting on the robotic fi n are shown for different angular amplitudes. ( C ) Damping constants computed from a linear fi t to the results shown in A are depicted as a function of frequency. β varies linearly as a function of f . ( D ) Computational results. Measured kinematics of fi sh 4 from three replicates of the data during hovering (no ambient fl ow) are used as inputs for the computational model. Computed forces over the ribbon fi n are shown as a function of steady-state fl ow speed ( U ). The three colors (red, green and blue) correspond to three replicates (sets) of data. Forces generated by the head wave ( + ), forces generated by the tail wave (x), and the net force produced by the two waves ( fi lled circles) are shown. 
Mutually opposing forces during locomotion can eliminate the tradeoff between maneuverability and stability

November 2013

·

203 Reads

·

98 Citations

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Significance Animals often produce substantial forces in directions that do not directly contribute to movement. For example, running and flying insects produce side-to-side forces as they travel forward. These forces generally “cancel out,” and so their role remains a mystery. Using a multidisciplinary approach, we show that mutually opposing forces can enhance both maneuverability and stability at the same time, although at some energetic cost. In addition to challenging the maneuverability–stability dichotomy within locomotion, our results challenge the same tradeoff within the engineering of mobile robots. This may inspire the exploration of a new set of strategies for the design and control of mobile systems.


A task-level model for optomotor yaw regulation in drosophila melanogaster: A frequency-domain system identification approach

December 2012

·

15 Reads

·

25 Citations

Fruit flies adeptly coordinate flight maneuvers to seek, avoid, or otherwise interact with salient objects in their environment. In the laboratory, tethered flies modulate yaw torque to steer towards a dark vertical visual stimulus. This stripe-fixation behavior is robust and repeatable, making it a powerful paradigm for the study of optomotor control in flies. In this work, we study stripe fixation through a series of closed-loop perturbation experiments; flies are observed stabilizing moving stripes oscillating over a range of frequencies. A system identification analysis of input-output data furnishes a frequency response function (FRF), a nonparametric description of the behavior. We parameterize this FRF description to hypothesize a Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) control model for the fixation behavior. Lastly, we revisit previous work in which discrepancies in open- and closed-loop performance in stripe fixation were used to support the reafference principle.We demonstrate that our hypothesized PID model (with a modest biologically plausible nonlinearity) provides a more parsimonious explanation for these previously reported discrepancies.


Fig.1. Schematics of the fish and the experimental setup. (A)Weakly electric fish have both visual and electrosensory systems. (B)The experimental setup shows the velocities of the fish, v(t), and the shuttle (refuge), r(t), as well as the tracking error, e(t), that were digitized for each trial. These velocities were used to calculate gain and phase of tracking, tracking error, swim path length and locomotor cost. For 60 trials, we also digitized the position of the tail.  
Fig.6. Tail bending of E. virescens may facilitate maintenance of lateral position in the dark. (A)Three sample frames that show the fish bending its tail, a behavior observed almost exclusively during tracking in the dark. (B)A sample trace showing the angle from the tip of the tail to middle of the body, relative to head direction. The three sample frames from A are indicated with black dots. (C)The mean tail-beat frequency for tracking in the dark across the three conductivity levels (Fish 1-4) and a blind fish (Fish 5) tracking in the light at medium conductivity. (D)Histogram of lateral position in the light (grey bars) and the dark (black bars) relative to the shuttle walls (open bars at top and bottom).
Active sensing via movement shapes spatiotemporal patterns of sensory feedback

May 2012

·

147 Reads

·

72 Citations

Journal of Experimental Biology

Previous work has shown that animals alter their locomotor behavior to increase sensing volumes. However, an animal's own movement also determines the spatial and temporal dynamics of sensory feedback. Because each sensory modality has unique spatiotemporal properties, movement has differential and potentially independent effects on each sensory system. Here we show that weakly electric fish dramatically adjust their locomotor behavior in relation to changes of modality-specific information in a task in which increasing sensory volume is irrelevant. We varied sensory information during a refuge-tracking task by changing illumination (vision) and conductivity (electroreception). The gain between refuge movement stimuli and fish tracking responses was functionally identical across all sensory conditions. However, there was a significant increase in the tracking error in the dark (no visual cues). This was a result of spontaneous whole-body oscillations (0.1 to 1 Hz) produced by the fish. These movements were costly: in the dark, fish swam over three times further when tracking and produced more net positive mechanical work. The magnitudes of these oscillations increased as electrosensory salience was degraded via increases in conductivity. In addition, tail bending (1.5 to 2.35 Hz), which has been reported to enhance electrosensory perception, occurred only during trials in the dark. These data show that both categories of movements - whole-body oscillations and tail bends - actively shape the spatiotemporal dynamics of electrosensory feedback.


Fig.1. (A)Experiment apparatus. The data acquisition board (DAQ) sends synchronized commands to the linear actuator (1; prescribing the trajectory) and the high-speed camera (4; triggering exposures). Riding smoothly along a set of guide rails and rigidly linked to the actuator, a rigid mast (2) suspends a PVC refuge near the bottom of the aquarium. Video is captured from below via an angled mirror (3) and images are subsequently ported back to the PC via CamLink. (B)Coordinate system. Distinct patches are tracked using an SSD algorithm (custom Matlab code). Positions and velocities of these patches are measured from a fixed reference. Red and blue squares indicate the features tracked on the fish and refuge, respectively.  
Fig.6. An example demonstrating that frequency response functions generalize better within stimulus class than across classes. Assuming superposition holds, the frequency response functions (FRFs) in Fig.5C generated from four fish, can be used to predict the response to an arbitrary input for a fifth fish. (A)10s of a sum-of-sines stimulus (blue) and the fish's response (green). (B)A comparison of predictions made by different FRF models. The sum-of-sines prediction (black) closely matches the fish's performance (green). The single-sine prediction (red) is worse than for the sum-of-sines FRF. (C)The difference between the single-sine and sum-of-sines prediction errors. Negative values (in red) indicate time intervals for which the single-sine FRF model has greater error than the sum-of-sines model. Predominantly, the sum-of-sines model better predicts the fish's actual response. If the system were linear, an assay of singlesine experiments would be sufficient for predicting the response to the sum-of-sines stimulus.
Stimulus predictability mediates a switch in locomotor smooth pursuit performance for Eigenmannia virescens

April 2011

·

70 Reads

·

73 Citations

Journal of Experimental Biology

The weakly electric glass knifefish, Eigenmannia virescens, will swim forward and backward, using propulsion from an anal ribbon fin, in response to motion of a computer-controlled moving refuge. Fish were recorded performing a refuge-tracking behavior for sinusoidal (predictable) and sum-of-sines (pseudo-random) refuge trajectories. For all trials, we observed high coherence between refuge and fish trajectories, suggesting linearity of the tracking dynamics. But superposition failed: we observed categorical differences in tracking between the predictable single-sine stimuli and the unpredictable sum-of-sines stimuli. This nonlinearity suggests a stimulus-mediated adaptation. At all frequencies tested, fish demonstrated reduced tracking error when tracking single-sine trajectories and this was typically accompanied by a reduction in overall movement. Most notably, fish demonstrated reduced phase lag when tracking single-sine trajectories. These data support the hypothesis that fish generate an internal dynamical model of the stimulus motion, hence improving tracking of predictable trajectories (relative to unpredictable ones) despite similar or reduced motor cost. Similar predictive mechanisms based on the dynamics of stimulus movement have been proposed recently, but almost exclusively for nonlocomotor tasks by humans, such as oculomotor target tracking and posture control. These data suggest that such mechanisms might be common across taxa and behaviors.


Synaptic Plasticity Can Produce and Enhance Direction Selectivity

March 2008

·

139 Reads

·

29 Citations

The discrimination of the direction of movement of sensory images is critical to the control of many animal behaviors. We propose a parsimonious model of motion processing that generates direction selective responses using short-term synaptic depression and can reproduce salient features of direction selectivity found in a population of neurons in the midbrain of the weakly electric fish Eigenmannia virescens. The model achieves direction selectivity with an elementary Reichardt motion detector: information from spatially separated receptive fields converges onto a neuron via dynamically different pathways. In the model, these differences arise from convergence of information through distinct synapses that either exhibit or do not exhibit short-term synaptic depression--short-term depression produces phase-advances relative to nondepressing synapses. Short-term depression is modeled using two state-variables, a fast process with a time constant on the order of tens to hundreds of milliseconds, and a slow process with a time constant on the order of seconds to tens of seconds. These processes correspond to naturally occurring time constants observed at synapses that exhibit short-term depression. Inclusion of the fast process is sufficient for the generation of temporal disparities that are necessary for direction selectivity in the elementary Reichardt circuit. The addition of the slow process can enhance direction selectivity over time for stimuli that are sustained for periods of seconds or more. Transient (i.e., short-duration) stimuli do not evoke the slow process and therefore do not elicit enhanced direction selectivity. The addition of a sustained global, synchronous oscillation in the gamma frequency range can, however, drive the slow process and enhance direction selectivity to transient stimuli. This enhancement effect does not, however, occur for all combinations of model parameters. The ratio of depressing and nondepressing synapses determines the effects of the addition of the global synchronous oscillation on direction selectivity. These ingredients, short-term depression, spatial convergence, and gamma-band oscillations, are ubiquitous in sensory systems and may be used in Reichardt-style circuits for the generation and enhancement of a variety of biologically relevant spatiotemporal computations.



Citations (9)


... Here, the terms G E (s) and G V (s) can be thought of as the "electrosense only" and "vision only" pathways, respectively ( Fig. 4G), as would be found in a hypothetical sensory ablation experiment [43]. ...

Reference:

Illumination mediates a switch in both active sensing and control in weakly electric fish
Integration of parallel mechanosensory and visual pathways resolved through sensory conflict

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

... Complementary to efforts dedicated to develop theoretical frameworks [35], the focus of the present overview, a substantial number of studies have been dedicated to the modeling of animal locomotion on a detailed biological level [36,37]. Starting from central pattern generators [10,38], it has been realized that observed walking patterns are at times difficult to classify into distinct gait classes [4]. ...

A comparative approach to closed-loop computation
  • Citing Article
  • April 2014

Current Opinion in Neurobiology

... Flies use optic flow, the pattern of motion generated by a visual scene moving over the eye, to guide ongoing locomotion. The "optomotor response" describes the tendency for a fly to turn in the direction of visual motion, a behavior that has been a focus of intense study for decades (Kalmus 1943;Götz 1964;Reichardt and Wenking 1969;Götz and Wenking 1973;Heisenberg and Götz 1975;Reichardt and Poggio 1976;Heisenberg and Wolf 1979;Götz 1987;Wolf and Heisenberg 1990;Tammero et al. 2004;Maimon et al. 2008;Mronz and Lehmann 2008;Theobald et al. 2010;Schnell et al. 2014). This optomotor response is most often studied with a tethered preparation, where a fly orients itself relative to a visual panorama. ...

Cellular mechanisms for integral feedback in visually guided behavior

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

... (f ) Transfer function fitting and system identification Transfer function fitting was performed using MATLAB and the method is detailed elsewhere [39]. In short, we fit the visual error and fly response to a first-order transfer function (equation royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rspb Proc. ...

A task-level model for optomotor yaw regulation in drosophila melanogaster: A frequency-domain system identification approach
  • Citing Conference Paper
  • December 2012

... Without prior training, these fish readily hover inside a moving refuge with precise positional and temporal coordination (Fig. 1A) [29]. The robust tracking performance, as well as illumination-dependent movement strategies [13,16], has made Eigenmannia an ideally suited model organism for sensorimotor control studies [30,31]. ...

Feedback Control as a Framework for Understanding Tradeoffs in Biology

Integrative and Comparative Biology

... We begin our modeling effort by choosing an appropriate 'plant' to represent the swimming dynamics of the fish. For this study, we employ the linear, physicsbased parametric model developed by Sefati et al (2013) as the plant. This model describes how changes in the fish's fore-aft position, p x (t), are influenced by changes in the position of the nodal point, u(t). ...

Mutually opposing forces during locomotion can eliminate the tradeoff between maneuverability and stability

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

... To overcome this sensory adaptation, animals appear to use ancillary movements, referred to as active sensing movements, that drive robust responses in their change-detecting sensory systems [4]- [6]. Animals use this strategy to enhance sensory information across sensory modalities, e.g., echolocation [7], whisking [8] and other forms of touch [9], [10], electrosense [11]- [13], and vision [14], [15]. It is well established that conditions of decreased sensory acuity lead to increased active movements [7], [12], [13], [15]- [20], suggesting a closed-loop perceptual process [21], [22]. ...

Active sensing via movement shapes spatiotemporal patterns of sensory feedback

Journal of Experimental Biology

... These fish prefer to remain hidden within shelter-like structures in their natural habitat and exhibit a behavior known as refuge tracking when their shelter moves. During refuge tracking, Eigenmannia track the longitudinal movements of their refuge by swimming forward and backward along a single linear dimension (Von der Emde 1999, Roth et al 2011, Sutton et al 2016, Uyanik et al 2019, Yang 2020, Yared 2020. Notably, under illuminated conditions, the fish performs a smooth pursuit task by tracking the moment-to-moment trajectories of the refuge. ...

Stimulus predictability mediates a switch in locomotor smooth pursuit performance for Eigenmannia virescens

Journal of Experimental Biology

... STP has been investigated in both vertebrates and invertebrates. It has been shown to be involved in a number of brain functions, including information filtering (temporal and frequency-dependent) [3, 8-10, 16, 22, 24, 26-43], adaptive filtering [9] and related phenomena (e.g., burst detection) [3,33,[44][45][46][47], temporal coding and information processing [33,34,[48][49][50][51], information flow [40,52,53] (given the presynaptic history-dependent nature of STP), gain control [54][55][56], the modulation of network responses to external inputs [57,58], the prolongation of neural responses to transient inputs [15,59,60], direction selectivity [61], vision (e.g., microsacades) [62], sound localization and hearing [63,64], the generation of cortical up and down states [65], attractor dynamics [55,66], navigation (e.g., place field sensing) [9,37], working memory [60,67], decision making [68] and neuronal computation [6,53,56,[69][70][71]. ...

Synaptic Plasticity Can Produce and Enhance Direction Selectivity