Search

Electrical synapses are present in almost all organisms that have a nervous system. However, their brain-wide expression patterns and the full range of contributions to neural function are unknown in most species. Here, we first provide a light-microscopic, immunohistochemistry-based anatomical map of all innexin gap junction proteins-the building blocks of electrical synapses-in the central nervous system of Drosophila melanogaster. Of those innexin types that are expressed in the nervous system, some localize to glial cells, whereas others are predominantly expressed in neurons, with shakB being the most widely expressed neuronal innexin. We then focus on the function of shakB in VS/HS cells-a class of visual projection neurons-thereby uncovering an unexpected role for electrical synapses. Removing shakB from these neurons leads to spontaneous, cell-autonomous voltage and calcium oscillations, demonstrating that electrical synapses are required for these cells' intrinsic stability. Furthermore, we investigate the role of shakB-type electrical synapses in early visual processing. We find that the loss of shakB from the visual circuits upstream of VS/HS cells differentially impairs ON and OFF visual motion processing pathways but is not required for the computation of direction selectivity per se. Taken together, our study demonstrates that electrical synapses are widespread across the Drosophila nervous system and that they play essential roles in neuronal function and visual information processing.

The reliable estimation of motion across varied surroundings represents a survival-critical task for sighted animals. How neural circuits have adapted to the particular demands of natural environments, however, is not well understood. We explored this question in the visual system of Drosophila melanogaster. Here, as in many mammalian retinas, motion is computed in parallel streams for brightness increments (ON) and decrements (OFF). When genetically isolated, ON and OFF pathways proved equally capable of accurately matching walking responses to realistic motion. To our surprise, detailed characterization of their functional tuning properties through in vivo calcium imaging and electrophysiology revealed stark differences in temporal tuning between ON and OFF channels. We trained an in silico motion estimation model on natural scenes and discovered that our optimized detector exhibited differences similar to those of the biological system. Thus, functional ON-OFF asymmetries in fly visual circuitry may reflect ON-OFF asymmetries in natural environments.

The extraction of directional motion information from changing retinal images is one of the earliest and most important processing steps in any visual system. In the fly optic lobe, two parallel processing streams have been anatomically described, leading from two first-order interneurons, L1 and L2, via T4 and T5 cells onto large, wide-field motion-sensitive interneurons of the lobula plate. Therefore, T4 and T5 cells are thought to have a pivotal role in motion processing; however, owing to their small size, it is difficult to obtain electrical recordings of T4 and T5 cells, leaving their visual response properties largely unknown. We circumvent this problem by means of optical recording from these cells in Drosophila, using the genetically encoded calcium indicator GCaMP5 (ref. 2). Here we find that specific subpopulations of T4 and T5 cells are directionally tuned to one of the four cardinal directions; that is, front-to-back, back-to-front, upwards and downwards. Depending on their preferred direction, T4 and T5 cells terminate in specific sublayers of the lobula plate. T4 and T5 functionally segregate with respect to contrast polarity: whereas T4 cells selectively respond to moving brightness increments (ON edges), T5 cells only respond to moving brightness decrements (OFF edges). When the output from T4 or T5 cells is blocked, the responses of postsynaptic lobula plate neurons to moving ON (T4 block) or OFF edges (T5 block) are selectively compromised. The same effects are seen in turning responses of tethered walking flies. Thus, starting with L1 and L2, the visual input is split into separate ON and OFF pathways, and motion along all four cardinal directions is computed separately within each pathway. The output of these eight different motion detectors is then sorted such that ON (T4) and OFF (T5) motion detectors with the same directional tuning converge in the same layer of the lobula plate, jointly providing the input to downstream circuits and motion-driven behaviours.

Detecting the direction of motion contained in the visual scene is crucial for many behaviors. However, because single photoreceptors only signal local luminance changes, motion detection requires a comparison of signals from neighboring photoreceptors across time in downstream neuronal circuits. For signals to coincide on readout neurons that thus become motion and direction selective, different input lines need to be delayed with respect to each other. Classical models of motion detection rely on non-linear interactions between two inputs after different temporal filtering. However, recent studies have suggested the requirement for at least three, not only two, input signals. Here, we comprehensively characterize the spatiotemporal response properties of all columnar input elements to the elementary motion detectors in the fruit fly, T4 and T5 cells, via two-photon calcium imaging. Between these input neurons, we find large differences in temporal dynamics. Based on this, computer simulations show that only a small subset of possible arrangements of these input elements maps onto a recently proposed algorithmic three-input model in a way that generates a highly direction-selective motion detector, suggesting plausible network architectures. Moreover, modulating the motion detection system by octopamine-receptor activation, we find the temporal tuning of T4 and T5 cells to be shifted toward higher frequencies, and this shift can be fully explained by the concomitant speeding of the input elements.

Different visual features of an object, such as its position and direction of motion, are important elements for animal orientation, but the neural circuits extracting them are generally not well understood. We analyzed this problem in Drosophila, focusing on two well-studied behaviors known as optomotor response and fixation response. In the neural circuit controlling the optomotor response, columnar T4 and T5 cells are thought to be crucial. We found that blocking T4 and T5 cells resulted in a complete loss of the optomotor response. Nevertheless, these flies were still able to fixate a black bar, although at a reduced performance level. Further analysis revealed that flies in which T4 and T5 cells were blocked possess an intact position circuit that is implemented in parallel to the motion circuit; the optomotor response is exclusively controlled by the motion circuit, whereas the fixation response is supported by both the position and the motion circuit.

SummaryDetecting the direction of visual movement is fundamental for every sighted animal in order to navigate, avoid predators, or detect conspecifics. Algorithmic models of correlation-type motion detectors describe the underlying computation remarkably well [1–3]. They consist of two spatially separated input lines that are asymmetrically filtered in time and then interact in a nonlinear way. However, the cellular implementation of this computation remains elusive. Recent connectomic data of the Drosophila optic lobe has suggested a neural circuit for the detection of moving bright edges (ON motion) with medulla cells Mi1 and Tm3 providing spatially offset input to direction-selective T4 cells, thereby forming the two input lines of a motion detector [4]. Electrophysiological characterization of Mi1 and Tm3 revealed different temporal filtering properties and proposed them to correspond to the delayed and direct input, respectively [5]. Here, we test this hypothesis by silencing either Mi1 or Tm3 cells and using electrophysiological recordings and behavioral responses of flies as a readout. We show that Mi1 is a necessary element of the ON pathway under all stimulus conditions. In contrast, Tm3 is specifically required only for the detection of fast ON motion in the preferred direction. We thereby provide first functional evidence that Mi1 and Tm3 are key elements of the ON pathway and uncover an unexpected functional specialization of these two cell types. Our results thus require an elaboration of the currently prevailing model for ON motion detection [6, 7] and highlight the importance of functional studies for neural circuit breaking.

SummarySpatial contrast, the difference in adjacent luminance values, provides information about objects, textures, and motion and supports diverse visual behaviors. Contrast computation is therefore an essential element of visual processing. The underlying mechanisms, however, are poorly understood. In human psychophysics, contrast illusions are means to explore such computations, but humans offer limited experimental access. Via behavioral experiments in Drosophila, we find that flies are also susceptible to contrast illusions. Using genetic silencing techniques, electrophysiology, and modeling, we systematically dissect the mechanisms and neuronal correlates underlying the behavior. Our results indicate that spatial contrast computation involves lateral inhibition within the same pathway that computes motion of luminance increments (ON pathway). Yet motion-blind flies, in which we silenced downstream motion-sensitive neurons needed for optomotor behavior, have fully intact contrast responses. In conclusion, spatial contrast and motion cues are first computed by overlapping neuronal circuits which subsequently feed into parallel visual processing streams.