Essay 29: sleep circuits

The first two parts of this essay were a general overview of the necessity of sleep and some of the properties. Here I’m going over some of the brainstem circuits that control sleep.

Wake ignition

Waking requires intrinsic motivation because sleeping places the animal away from distraction, to an extreme in hibernation. A short nap, as is more typical in the waking period, needs to end without needing external stimulus or an internal one like hunger. What’s needed is an internal ignition source to drive wake and motivation.

In rodents, if the area around R.pb (parabrachial nucleus in r1) is lesioned, the animal remains in a coma [Fuller et al 2011]. For humans, a study of coma showed a pattern of the same area as consistently being destroyed [Grady et al 2022]. However, the exact cells aren’t known, and other studies that lesion R.pb for conditioned taste studies don’t produce coma. Still, this site seems a likely ignition area.

Possible wake ignition subcircuit. R.pb is the main ignition source and wakes motivational areas like H.l. H.l (lateral hypothalamus), N5 (trigeminal nerve), N10 (vagus nerve), Nsp (spinal cord), R.pb (parabrachial nucleus), R.pz (parafacial zone).

The above diagram shows a possible wake ignition circuit. The area around R.pb is the main wake ignition node. R.pb produces wake by stimulating motivational areas like H.l (and others).

It’s not known if the R.pb area is self-igniting or if astrocytes in the area are critical, or if it uses peripheral wake signals such as N5 (trigeminal nerve), N10 (vagus nerve), or N.sp (spinal cord or other periphery) [Grady et al 2022]. In the fruit fly Drosophila specialized peripheral leg neurons can promote daytime sleep [Jones et al 2023]. These specialized neurons are distinct from sensor or motor neurons. In addition peripheral neurons from Drosophila PPM area are wake promoting [Satterfield et al 2022]. So, it seems plausible that peripheral nerves such as N5, N10, or N.sp could have similar wake-producing neurons, although this is entirely speculative.

If R.pb is a wake-ignition system, then sleep needs to suppress it, whether by internal clock regulation, or external suppression. In the hindbrain, R.pz (parafacial zone near N7 and r5 / r6) suppresses R.pb to create sleep [Anaclet et al 2014]. Disabling R.pz decreases NREM sleep by 30% [Erikson et al 2019].

Hindbrain (rhombomere) sleep

R.rs (reticulospinal) neurons in the caudal hindbrain (medulla, r6-r8) have both wake and sleep effects. Because R.rs are motor control neurons, they need to suppress sleep while they’re active, but the same area also contains sleep promoting areas. So, when experimenters stimulate the area, the animal remains awake, but immediately following the end of stimulation the animal sleeps, because the sleep-inhibition is removed. [Teng et al 2022]. These R.rs neurons (ventrolateral medulla) send collaterals to Po.vl (ventrolateral preoptic area), which is a forebrain sleep / wake area.

Midbrain sleep

A specific nucleus near N3 (oculomotor nerve) and associated motor areas (Edinger-Westphal) is a sleep promoting area. Stimulating it increases NREM [Zhang et al 2019]. (I’m just noting this for reference. I don’t understand how this area connects with other sleep areas.)

Ventral preoptic area

Although wake-maintaining areas are widely distributed, and much of sleep-circuitry is postponing sleep for ongoing actions, sleep-promoting area are more rare. One sleep-promoting area is Po.vl (ventrolateral preoptic area) and Po.mn (median preoptic area), which are adjacent area. Po.vl is inhibitory GABA and inhibits neurotransmitter wake areas like V.lc (locus coeruleous – norepinephrine), Vta (dopamine), V.dr (serotonin), M.pag.v (which is V.dr but refers to a dopamine area), and Ppt (pedunculopontine nucleus – acetylcholine) and P.ldt (laterodorsal tegmental nucleus – also acetylcholine).

Po.vl sleep-promoting area suppresses wake-promoting areas. H.l (lateral hypothalamus), Po.vl (ventrolateral preoptic area), R.pb (parabrachial nucleus), R.pz (parafacial zone), V (wake-neurotransmitter areas including dopamine, histamine, serotonin, acetylcholine, orexin).

In the diagram above, Po.vl promotes sleep by inhibiting wake-promoting areas, here represented by H.l and V, where V includes the neurotransmitter wake areas. This Po.vl function is one pole of the flip-flop analogy [Saper et al 2001], driving sleep transitions faster and supporting continuous sleep, avoiding fragmentation.

Lateral Hypothalamus

H.l is a sleep wake hub [Gazea 2021] with both wake-promoting peptide orexin, and GABA neurons promoting wake. The orexin peptide is wake-related, because if it’s missing, people and animals develop narcolepsy and cataplexy. H.l orexin neurons project to other wake-promoting areas like V.lc, Ppt, V.dr, Vta, and is believed to sustain wakefulness.

Stimulating orexin neurons does produce wake after sleep, but only after 10-20 seconds, so these aren’t directly wake producing, but more wake facilitating. In contrast, V.lc norepinephrine neurons produce wake in 2 seconds [Yamaguchi et al 2018].

In addition, a study suggested that human orexin is low at dawn, a time when people are active and twos to peak at dusk [Mogavero et al 2023]. So orexin’s role is something more complicated than simply a wake-promoting peptide. (Note: this study seemed somewhat unreliable. I’d like to see a more detailed orexin over time study for rodents, where measurements can be more precise).

Other sleep and wake neurons exist in H.l without the orexin [Heiss et al 2018]. For example, some Vta GABA neurons that express SST (somatostatin) store sleep requirements for up to 5 hours, and signal the extra sleep need to H.l [Yu et al 2019].

Lateral hypothalamus and value neurotransmitters as a wake hub. Hb (habenula), H.l (lateral hypothalamus), pineal (pineal gland), R.pb (parabrachial nucleus), V (wake-promoting neuropeptides)

The above diagram shows two complementary roles for H.l. First, H.l can suppress Hb.l circadian sleep-promoting path with H.l orexin projections to Hb that inhibit anaesthesia [Zhou et al 2023] and promote aggressive arousal [Flanigan et al 2020].

The positive feedback loop from H.l to Hb (habenula) to V and back to H.l sustains wake. The gain for positive feedback could vary in circadian cycles. A high gain in the morning could produce full wake even with little activity. A low gain at night would make it harder to sustain wake.

Misc notes: Sleep preparation is a distinct, complicated pre-sleep behavior. One trigger seems to be from F.pl (pre limbic frontal cortex) SST neurons to H.l [Tossell et al 2023]. Astrocytes also seem to be involved with H.l wake, are active when waking and promoting wakefulness [Cai et al 2022]. H.pv is also sleep promoting and if it’s knocked out, significant daytime sleep increases, particularly in the morning [Chen et al 2021]. In contrast, the posterior hypothalamus has astrocytes that increase sleep at night [Pelluru et al 2016].

Vta sleep/wake glutamate and GABA

For the moment, let’s ignore Vta (ventral tegmental area) dopamine. Vta includes glutamate and GABA neurons that derive from r1 (hindbrain rhombomere 1) [Lahti et al 2016] that enhance wake with glutamate [Yu et al 2019] and enhance sleep with GABA [Chowdury et al 2019]. The tail of Vta, RMTg (rostromedial tegmental are in r2 / r3) is essential for NREM sleep [Yang et al 2018].

Vta glutamate, GABA, and DA all control sleep using H.l and S.msh (medial shell of the ventral stratum aka nucleus accumbens). As noted above, H.l is a coordinator of sleep and wake with not only orexin but also GABA and glutamate. Inhibiting Vta GABA bypasses sleep homeostasis, producing a mania state during circadian wake times [Yu et al 2021], [Yu et al 2022].

Vta glutamate stimulation promotes continuous wake independent of DA [Yu et al 2019], via projections to H.l, S.sh, and P.v (ventral pallidum), particularly the NOS1 cells.

Vta.g (GABA neurons of Vta) stimulation encourages NREM sleep. If Vta.g are inhibited, the animal remains 100% awake for hours, during the normal wake period, not the normal sleep period [Yu et al 2022]. The Hb.l projection to Vta.g is required for the anesthetic propofol to work [Gelegen et al 2018].

Interestingly, a specific SST (somatostatin) subset of Vta GABA retains a future sleep requirement from social defeat, where social defeat produces extra sleep. When the rodent loses a conflict, these Vta SST neurons have elevated calcium for up to five hours, and then the animal sleeps, these neurons fire to H.l, extending sleep duration [Yu et al 2019]. Speculating here, this multi-hour memory suggests a possible astrocyte involvement.

Returning the dopamine. Vta dopamine produces wake, while Vta dopamine inhibition produces sleep with nesting behavior [Eban-Rothschild et al 2016], as opposed to immediate collapse like narcolepsy. Low dopamine in a behaviorist experiment produces long decays, difficulty in locomotion and sleepiness [Nicola 2007]. However, other studies argue that dopamine itself is not wake promoting [Takata et al 2018].

Habenula

As mentioned in a previous post, Hb (habenula) is a sleep-promoting area as a motor-inhibiting area driven by the pineal gland and extending melatonin’s role [Hikosaka 2012]. This sleep promoting area is in a positive feedback loop with the wake-promoting neurotransmitters and peptides.

Pineal gland through habenula as promoting sleep by suppressing motivation and motor action. Hb (habenula), V (wake-promoting neurotransmitters and peptides).

This above diagram is a different perspective on the prior H.l diagram, where I’ve merged H.l into V and made the motor and motivation suppression explicit. Here the wake-promoting neurotransmitters gate motivation and motor, extending the role of melatonin, which suppresses action.

Active actions promote wake and suppress sleep, like the R.rs wake efferent copies [Teng et al 2022], by stimulating the value neurons. In turn, the value neurons suppress the habenula such as Vta to Hb.l [Webster et al 2021] and serotonin inhibiting Hb.l [Tchenio 2016], H.l orexin and GABA also inhibit Hb.l [Flanigan 2020], [Gazea 2021]. As mentioned above, these positive feedback loops sustain wake despite sleep pressure.

Summary circuit

Putting these components of the sleep/wake circuit together produces something like the following, where I’ve emphasized the habenula to show how that subsystem fit into the whole circuit.

Sleep/wake circuit emphasizing the pineal, melatonin habenula path. Hb (habenula), H.l (lateral hypothalamus), S/P (basal ganglia), Po.v (ventrolateral and median preoptic areas), R.pb (parabrachial nucleus), R.pz (parafacial zone).

As before, the circadian sleep drive from the pineal gland drives the habenula, which inhibits wake neurotransmitters, which inhibits motivation and action using the basal ganglia as a gate. Ongoing action sustains wake against habenula-driven sleep pressure.

Sleep/wake summary circuit. Hb (habenula), H.l (lateral hypothalamus), S/P (basal ganglia), Po.vl (ventrolateral preoptic area), R.pb (parabrachial nucleus), R.pz (parafacial zone).

The full diagram includes the wake-ignition circuit from R.pb, the sleep-sustain circuit in Po.v (Po.vl and Po.mn), and the wake-sustain circuit in H.l and V. As a reminder, this model is highly simplified and really only serves as a skeleton to organize the various brainstem sleep systems.

Cortical slow wave sleep

Although I’m trying to avoid the cortex as long as possible, studies use cortical slow waves as a sleep marker, so it’s inescapable. Cortical slow waves are globally synchronized neuron firing between around 0.5Hz to 4Hz. The slow wave firing has no information content, but the oscillations may help clear the cortex of metabolic toxins.

During wake, neurons expend to fill the intercellular space because of the neuron’s ion gradients. Filling the intercellular space means the CSF (cerebral-spinal fluid) can’t clear metabolic toxins [Xie et al 2013]. Slow wave sleep shrinks the neurons allowing fluid to fill the intercellular space, and the oscillations may even help with fluid circulation [Fultz et al 2019].

Cortical sleep appears strongly coupled to astrocytes. Astrocyte calcium precedes slow waves in the cortex [Poskanzer and Yuste 2016]. Astrocytes may even organized SWS waves across the cortex, using electrical gap junctions to connect to astrocyte neighbors [Vaidyanathan et al 2021].

Wake signals driving cortical wake. C (cortex), H.l (lateral hypothalamus), Hb (habenula), P.bf (basal forebrain), V (wake neuropeptides)

The above diagram shows a simplified cortical wake circuit, although the cortex is also affected by wake neurotransmitters norepinephrine, serotonin and dopamine. In this model the cortex is mostly an appendage of the brainstem sleep circuit, waking when the brainstem wakes.

P.bf (basal forebrain) is a set of GABA and ACh nuclei that activate the cortex, hippocampus, and olfactory bulb. Although P.bf is identified by its ACh neurons, the GABA projections seem to be more important for wake.

Notes: Local cortical sleep pressure is signaled with GABA [Alfonsa et al 2023]. Parts of the cortex can sleep independently [Krueger et al 2013].

Ppt and P.ldt ACh and wake

Although I’ve lumped Ppt (pedunculopontine nucleus) and P.ldt (laterodorsal tegmental nucleus) with the “V” wake promoting areas, they deserve a special mention because of their connection and similarity with P.bf. Ppt and P.ldt are ACh ganglia near the isthmus midbrain-hindbrain boundary. Ppt is part of the MLR, showing the tight connection between locomotion and wake. Ppt feeds into P.bf, the striatum, and other locomotive regions like H.stn.

Interestingly, all Ppt neurons self-generate gamma oscillations through intrinsic channels [Garcia-Rill et al 2015]. So it could be an ignition source of gamma activation in the striatum and cortex.

References

Alfonsa H, Burman RJ, Brodersen PJN, Newey SE, Mahfooz K, Yamagata T, Panayi MC, Bannerman DM, Vyazovskiy VV, Akerman CJ. Intracellular chloride regulation mediates local sleep pressure in the cortex. Nat Neurosci. 2023 Jan;26(1):64-78. 

Anaclet C, Ferrari L, Arrigoni E, Bass CE, Saper CB, Lu J, Fuller PM. The GABAergic parafacial zone is a medullary slow wave sleep-promoting center. Nat Neurosci. 2014 Sep;17(9):1217-24. 

Cai P, Huang SN, Lin ZH, Wang Z, Liu RF, Xiao WH, Li ZS, Zhu ZH, Yao J, Yan XB, Wang FD, Zeng SX, Chen GQ, Yang LY, Sun YK, Yu C, Chen L, Wang WX. Regulation of wakefulness by astrocytes in the lateral hypothalamus. Neuropharmacology. 2022 Dec 15;221:109275. 

Chen CR, Zhong YH, Jiang S, Xu W, Xiao L, Wang Z, Qu WM, Huang ZL. Dysfunctions of the paraventricular hypothalamic nucleus induce hypersomnia in mice. Elife. 2021 Nov 17;10:e69909. doi: 10.7554/eLife.69909.

Chowdhury S, Matsubara T, Miyazaki T, Ono D, Fukatsu N, Abe M, Sakimura K, Sudo Y, Yamanaka A. GABA neurons in the ventral tegmental area regulate non-rapid eye movement sleep in mice. Elife. 2019 Jun 4;8:e44928.

Eban-Rothschild A, Rothschild G, Giardino WJ, Jones JR, de Lecea L. VTA dopaminergic neurons regulate ethologically relevant sleep-wake behaviors. Nat Neurosci. 2016 Oct;19(10):1356-66. doi: 10.1038/nn.4377. Epub 2016 Sep 5.

Erickson ETM, Ferrari LL, Gompf HS, Anaclet C. Differential Role of Pontomedullary Glutamatergic Neuronal Populations in Sleep-Wake Control. Front Neurosci. 2019 Jul 30;13:755. 

Flanigan ME, Aleyasin H, Li L, Burnett CJ, Chan KL, LeClair KB, Lucas EK, Matikainen-Ankney B, Durand-de Cuttoli R, Takahashi A, Menard C, Pfau ML, Golden SA, Bouchard S, Calipari ES, Nestler EJ, DiLeone RJ, Yamanaka A, Huntley GW, Clem RL, Russo SJ. Orexin signaling in GABAergic lateral habenula neurons modulates aggressive behavior in male mice. Nat Neurosci. 2020 May;23(5):638-650.

Fuller PM, Sherman D, Pedersen NP, Saper CB, Lu J. Reassessment of the structural basis of the ascending arousal system. J Comp Neurol. 2011 Apr 1;519(5):933-56. 

Fultz NE, Bonmassar G, Setsompop K, Stickgold RA, Rosen BR, Polimeni JR, Lewis LD. Coupled electrophysiological, hemodynamic, and cerebrospinal fluid oscillations in human sleep. Science. 2019 Nov 1;366(6465):628-631.

Garcia-Rill E, Hyde J, Kezunovic N, Urbano FJ, Petersen E. The physiology of the pedunculopontine nucleus: implications for deep brain stimulation. J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2015 Feb;122(2):225-35. 

Gazea M, Furdan S, Sere P, Oesch L, Molnár B, Di Giovanni G, Fenno LE, Ramakrishnan C, Mattis J, Deisseroth K, Dymecki SM, Adamantidis AR, Lőrincz ML. Reciprocal Lateral Hypothalamic and Raphe GABAergic Projections Promote Wakefulness. J Neurosci. 2021 Jun 2;41(22):4840-4849. 

Gelegen C, Miracca G, Ran MZ, Harding EC, Ye Z, Yu X, Tossell K, Houston CM, Yustos R, Hawkins ED, Vyssotski AL, Dong HL, Wisden W, Franks NP. Excitatory Pathways from the Lateral Habenula Enable Propofol-Induced Sedation. Curr Biol. 2018 Feb 19;28(4):580-587.e5.

Grady FS, Boes AD, Geerling JC. A Century Searching for the Neurons Necessary for Wakefulness. Front Neurosci. 2022 Jul 19;16:930514.

Heiss JE, Yamanaka A, Kilduff TS. Parallel Arousal Pathways in the Lateral Hypothalamus. eNeuro. 2018 Aug 21;5(4):ENEURO.0228-18.2018.

Hikosaka O. The habenula: from stress evasion to value-based decision-making. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010 Jul;11(7):503-13.

Jones JD, Holder BL, Eiken KR, Vogt A, Velarde AI, Elder AJ, McEllin JA, Dissel S. Regulation of sleep by cholinergic neurons located outside the central brain in Drosophila. PLoS Biol. 2023 Mar 2;21(3):e3002012. 

Krueger JM, Huang YH, Rector DM, Buysse DJ. Sleep: a synchrony of cell activity-driven small network states. Eur J Neurosci. 2013 Jul;38(2):2199-209. 

Lahti L, Haugas M, Tikker L, Airavaara M, Voutilainen MH, Anttila J, Kumar S, Inkinen C, Salminen M, Partanen J. Differentiation and molecular heterogeneity of inhibitory and excitatory neurons associated with midbrain dopaminergic nuclei. Development. 2016 Feb 1;143(3):516-29. 

Mogavero MP, Godos J, Grosso G, Caraci F, Ferri R. Rethinking the Role of Orexin in the Regulation of REM Sleep and Appetite. Nutrients. 2023 Aug 22;15(17):3679. 

Nicola SM. Reassessing wanting and liking in the study of mesolimbic influence on food intake. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2016 Nov 1;311(5):R811-R840. 

Pelluru D, Konadhode RR, Bhat NR, Shiromani PJ. Optogenetic stimulation of astrocytes in the posterior hypothalamus increases sleep at night in C57BL/6J mice. Eur J Neurosci. 2016 May;43(10):1298-306.

Poskanzer KE, Yuste R. Astrocytes regulate cortical state switching in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 May 10;113(19):E2675-84. 

Saper CB, Fuller PM, Pedersen NP, Lu J, Scammell TE. Sleep state switching. Neuron. 2010 Dec 22;68(6):1023-42.

Satterfield LK, De J, Wu M, Qiu T, Joiner WJ. Inputs to the sleep homeostat originate outside the brain. J Neurosci. 2022 Jun 9;42(29):5695–704. 

Tchenio A, Valentinova K, Mameli M. Can the Lateral Habenula Crack the Serotonin Code? Front Synaptic Neurosci. 2016 Oct 24;8:34.

Teng S, Zhen F, Wang L, Schalchli JC, Simko J, Chen X, Jin H, Makinson CD, Peng Y. Control of non-REM sleep by ventrolateral medulla glutamatergic neurons projecting to the preoptic area. Nat Commun. 2022 Aug 12;13(1):4748. 

Tossell K, Yu X, Giannos P, Anuncibay Soto B, Nollet M, Yustos R, Miracca G, Vicente M, Miao A, Hsieh B, Ma Y, Vyssotski AL, Constandinou T, Franks NP, Wisden W. Somatostatin neurons in prefrontal cortex initiate sleep-preparatory behavior and sleep via the preoptic and lateral hypothalamus. Nat Neurosci. 2023 Oct;26(10):1805-1819. 

Vaidyanathan TV, Collard M, Yokoyama S, Reitman ME, Poskanzer KE. Cortical astrocytes independently regulate sleep depth and duration via separate GPCR pathways. Elife. 2021 Mar 17;10:e63329.

Webster JF, Lecca S, Wozny C. Inhibition Within the Lateral Habenula-Implications for Affective Disorders. Front Behav Neurosci. 2021 Nov 26;15:786011.

Xin W, Schuebel KE, Jair KW, Cimbro R, De Biase LM, Goldman D, Bonci A. Ventral midbrain astrocytes display unique physiological features and sensitivity to dopamine D2 receptor signaling. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2019 Jan;44(2):344-355.

Yamaguchi H, Hopf FW, Li SB, de Lecea L. In vivo cell type-specific CRISPR knockdown of dopamine beta hydroxylase reduces locus coeruleus evoked wakefulness. Nat Commun. 2018 Dec 6;9(1):5211. 

Yang SR, Hu ZZ, Luo YJ, Zhao YN, Sun HX, Yin D, Wang CY, Yan YD, Wang DR, Yuan XS, Ye CB, Guo W, Qu WM, Cherasse Y, Lazarus M, Ding YQ, Huang ZL. The rostromedial tegmental nucleus is essential for non-rapid eye movement sleep. PLoS Biol. 2018 Apr 13;16(4):e2002909. 

Yu X, Li W, Ma Y, Tossell K, Harris JJ, Harding EC, Ba W, Miracca G, Wang D, Li L, Guo J, Chen M, Li Y, Yustos R, Vyssotski AL, Burdakov D, Yang Q, Dong H, Franks NP, Wisden W. GABA and glutamate neurons in the VTA regulate sleep and wakefulness. Nat Neurosci. 2019 Jan;22(1):106-119. 

Yu X, Ba W, Zhao G, Ma Y, Harding EC, Yin L, Wang D, Li H, Zhang P, Shi Y, Yustos R, Vyssotski AL, Dong H, Franks NP, Wisden W. Dysfunction of ventral tegmental area GABA neurons causes mania-like behavior. Mol Psychiatry. 2021 Sep;26(9):5213-5228. 

Yu X, Zhao G, Wang D, Wang S, Li R, Li A, Wang H, Nollet M, Chun YY, Zhao T, Yustos R, Li H, Zhao J, Li J, Cai M, Vyssotski AL, Li Y, Dong H, Franks NP, Wisden W. A specific circuit in the midbrain detects stress and induces restorative sleep. Science. 2022 Jul;377(6601):63-72. 

Zhang J, Peng Y, Liu C, Zhang Y, Liang X, Yuan C, Shi W, Zhang Y. Dopamine D1-receptor-expressing pathway from the nucleus accumbens to ventral pallidum-mediated sevoflurane anesthesia in mice. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2023 Nov;29(11):3364-3377. 

Zhou F, Wang D, Li H, Wang S, Zhang X, Li A, Tong T, Zhong H, Yang Q, Dong H. Orexinergic innervations at GABAergic neurons of the lateral habenula mediates the anesthetic potency of sevoflurane. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2023 May;29(5):1332-1344. 

Essay 29: Sleep – circadian

As mentioned in the previous post, sleep is often divided into circadian sleep and homeostatic sleep, although this model is an oversimplification in part because of the metabolic cycles [Borbély et al 2016]. Despite the caveats, I think starting from circadian circuits is a good start.

Also as mentioned previously, circadian cycles may have started as an oxidation-reduction cycle to project from oxygen’s toxicity after the Great Oxidation Event [Edgar et al 2012]. One of the early solutions is melatonin, a powerful natural antioxidant [Tosches et al 2014].

Melatonin

Melatonin exists in almost all animals except sponges. Along with its antioxidant properties, it signals for the zooplankton diel vertical migration, swimming toward the light at dusk and sinking at night [Tosches et al 2014].

System for melatonin-controlled zooplankton vertical migration. ACh (acetylcholine).

In the migrating zooplankton, melatonin triggers ACh (acetylcholine) neurons, which rhythmically spike and these spikes disrupt the cilia, disorganizing them and allowing the plankton to sink.

Reptile and mammal complications

As a complication to understanding the vertebrate circuits, both reptiles and mammals have sleep requirements at odds with aquatic vertebrates. Because land temperatures change more than water temperatures, and reptiles are cold-blooded, their sleep and wake is necessarily strongly tied to temperature as well as the common light/dark connection [Rial et al 2022]. So, sleep and temperature are highly correlated, which makes the Poa (preoptic area) combination of temperature and sleep functions more reasonable than a seemingly random combination.

Mammals have the additional complication of the evolutionary nocturnal bottleneck [Rial et al 2022], meaning the simple heuristic of nighttime melatonin for sleep isn’t sufficient. The pineal melatonin is still at night for nocturnal animals [cite], and the light signaling needs to flip. Although diurnal mammals are no longer nocturnal, their clock circuitry retains the heritage of a nocturnal flip.

As a specific example, all non-mammalian vertebrates use the pineal gland as a circadian oscillator, not H.scn (subthalamic nucleus) [Vatine et al 2011].

Pineal gland and habenula

The pineal gland in the midbrain is the vertebrate’s main source of melatonin. Evolutionarily, the pineal gland is derived from photosensitive cells that directly convert light and dark into melatonin. In non-mammals, the pineal gland is still photosensitive. In the zebrafish, the pineal photoreceptor is still effect and entrains circadian cycles [Vatine et al 2011], and an analogous region in the non-vertebrate chordate Amphioxus provides a similar function, showing the pineal gland’s conserved function in vertebrates [Lacalli 2022].

Hb.m and Hb.l (medial and lateral habenula) derive from the pineal complex, and may have originally been effectors of the pineal gland, serving a nervous function analogous to melatonin [Hikosaka 2010]. Hb.l in particular is well-suited to control neurotransmitters associated with wake, such as dopamine from Vta (ventral tegmental area), serotonin from V.dr and V.mr (dorsal and medial raphe), and norepinephrine from V.lc (locus coeruleus). Note that melatoninAs explored in essay 20, Hb.m is involved in primitive phototaxis and chemotaxis and is well-placed to inhibit those actions during sleep.

Habenula control of sleep by gating motive from action. Hb (habenula), pineal (pineal gland).

In the above diagram, a primitive habenula function is to suppress sensation, motivation and action for sleep by suppression wake-supporting neurotransmitters. Although the diagram illustrates the habenula as disconnecting motive from action, it could also disconnect sense from action, as in phototaxis or chemotaxis in Hb.m.

Hb.m includes an internal entrainable circadian clock, unlike Hb.l. The Hb.m clock is necessary for ultradian foraging. The foraging ultradian is around four hours, generally on waking. Both dopamine and NE (norepinephrine) are elevated [Wang et al 2023] and reciprocally the circadian clock is set by dopamine and NE [Salaberry and Mendoza 2022].

Some misc notes: Hb.l is required for some anesthesia (propofol) and stimulating Hb.l strongly induces NREM, and suppresses motor [Gelengen et al 2018]. Hb.l stimulus produces NREM [Goldstein 1983]. Hb.l is more active mid and late day and early night [Aizawa et al 2013] (possibly producing morning ultradian activity). Hb.l manipulation produces wake fragmentation in the wake period and sleep fragmentation in the sleep period via orexin in H.l [Gelengen et al 2018].

Cell clocks

As mentioned in the introduction, the oxidation-reduction protection may have led to the development of cellular clocks. Essentially all cells have circadian cycle in protein expression, including metabolic and detoxification cells in the liver, heart, kidneys and digestion [Dibner et al 2010], even including gut bioflora. The clocks are synchronized by multiple signals, including feeding patterns, but most studied by light.

For example, dopamine is under clock control and is modulated by melatonin [Ashton and Jagannath 2020]. In S.v (ventrial striatum aka nucleus accumbens) dopamine is at a daily low at night. DAT (dopamine transporter), affected by cocaine, is regulated by clock genes [Alsonso et al 2021], possibly under control of astrocytes. Dopamine is particularly tonically high in early morning before eating with an ultradian cycle of about four hours. Two four-ish hour dopamine cycles are known: the FEO (food entrainable oscillator), which produces pre-feeding activity [Dibner et al 2010], and MASCO (methamphetamine-sensitive circadian oscillatory) [Tataroglu et al 2006], which may be the same system.

The retina itself is under circadian control, modulated by dopamine and D2i (inhibitory Gi-coupled dopamine receptor) [Yujinovsky et al 2006], including in frogs [Cahill and Besharse 1991].

And astrocytes in S.v are under circadian cell clock control [Becker-Krail et al 2022]. Astrocytes are well-placed to manage sleep because they have widespread connections to many synapses and are connected to other astrocytes with gap junctions, allowing for integration over time and space and widespread broadcast signaling.

H.scn circadian entrainment

The circadian system has three distinct components that can either work on their own or work together:

  • Cell clocks
  • Light / dark photoreceptors or feeding signals and behavior
  • Entraining the cell clock to the signal (zeitgeber)

If the eye area of the mollusk sea hare is lesioned, circadian entrainment is eliminated, but because of other photoreceptors, the animal still follows light and dark cycles as long as the light changes. The deficit is only exposed when the lesioned mollusks are placed under continual dark [Vorster et al 2014], [Newcomb et al 2014]. Similarly, in zebrafish many cells are photoreceptive without entraining the cellular clocks.

Mammals use H.scn (suprachiasmatic nucleus) to coordinate circadian cellular clocks. The H.scn name is important, but it’s located above the optic crossing (suprachiasmatic) and developmentally the retina develops from the hypothalamus adjacent to H.scn.

Abstract representation of the mammalian brain highlighting the proximity of the retina and H.scn. arc (H.arc – arcuate nucleus), C (cortex), CB (cerebellum), H.l (lateral hypothalamus), ip (R.ip interpeduncular nucleus), mb (H.mb mammillary bodies), MHB (midbrain-hindbrain boundary), P (pallidum), S (striatum), scn (suprachiasmatic nucleus), sum (supramammillary nucleus), Vta (ventral tegmental area), r1 (rhombomere 1), ZLI (zona-limitans intrathalamica)

The diagram above shows the rough location of the retina development area and H.scn, which both develop from the hypothalamus. A primitive eye with only a few photoreceptors would have been part of the hypothalamus, and like the mollusk the photoreceptor would be near the clock entrainment circuit that became H.scn.

The H.scn clock signal is somewhat indirect, with an interim projection to H.scz to H.dm (dorsomedial hypothalamus) and finally to H.l (lateral hypothalamus) for wake and Po.vl (ventrolateral preoptic area) for sleep. H.scn uses dopamine from Vta as part of its synchronization [Grippo et al 2017].

Ultradian DA – morning foraging

The sleep / wake cycle has an additional boost during normal foraging times such as immediately after waking. In the subjective morning (dark for rodents), wake is encouraged, homeostatic sleep is suppressed, and dopamine levels are higher. After the foraging boost ends, but still in the wake period, tonic dopamine levels drop and the animals take more frequent naps. This hut radian boost of about four hours affects learning and behavior as well as modulating drug abuse [Ruby et al 2013].

Sleep / wake cycle showing morning boost. ZT (zeitgeber time).

Because this ultradian foraging boots wake and suppresses sleep significantly, studies that stimulate or inhibit sleep and wake can specifically affect the ultradian boost without affecting other sleep / wake periods. So it’s very important to look at the hourly effects because the experimental modulation might reduce the foraging boost specifically, but a summary might show a general sleep increase.

H.scn circadian entrainment uses dopamine. DA from either Vta [Grippo et al 2017], [Tang et al 2022] and/or H.sum (supramammillary nucleus) [Luo et al 2018] can entrain food circadian cycles. Note that since the dopamine “A10” area extends beyond the Vta to include H.sum and M.pag.v on opposite ends of the Vta, these studies may be reporting the same area.

As mentioned above, there are also the food entrained oscillator [Liu et al 2012], [Gallardo et al 2014], [Pendergast and Yamazaki 2019], [Ashton and Jagannath 2020], and the meth-sensitive oscillator [Tataroglu et al 2006], which are also dopamine related and may be part of the same system.

Neurotransmitters and peptides

The inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA is associated with sleep, and many sleep drugs are GABA stimulants. GABA neurons in Snr (substantia nigra pars reticulata), H.zi (zona incerta), Vta, and Po.vl are all associated with sleep. As mentioned above GABA from mitochondria and in Hydra are used as a sleep promoting neurotransmitter.

While GABA is associated with sleep, other major neurotransmitters like NE, DA, 5HT (serotonin), ACh (acetylcholine) and histamine are associated with wake maintenance of the execution of wakefulness. As discussed in the previous post, ongoing actions need to suppress sleep. NE, DA, and 5HT are all maintain wake while the animal is active and drop when the animal is winding down activity to sleep. Cortical wake requires activity in ACh-rich area in Ppt (pedunculopontine nucleus), P.ldt (laterodorsal tegmental nucleus), and P.bf (basal forebrain).

Produced by H.l, orexin (aka hypocretin) appears to be a wake-maintenance peptide since removal of orexin produces narcolepsy. H.l orexin projects to essentially all of the other wake-maintaining neurotransmitters, including NE, DA, 5HT and ACh. Orexin is slow, waking after tens of seconds, while stimulating V.lc NE is around two seconds [Yamaguchi et al 2018]. On counterargument is that orexin can ramp later in the day [Grady et al 2006], [Mogavero et al 2023], which would suggest that it’s not part of the ultradian foraging system, although it’s also highly tied to foraging. (Suggesting I need to read more articles to see if the contradiction has been resolved.)

Although orexin is the most dramatic of H.l wake, H.l also includes wake and sleep producing GABA and glutamate neurons that may be even more important for wake, independent of the orexin function. Unfortunately, H.l is complex enough that the different functions haven’t been fully pulled apart.

Adenosine is a sleep-promoting molecule derived from the energy molecule ATP, and has extensive receptor throughout the brain, notable in the striatum. Because it’s a product of ATP, it measures local neural activity and possibly sleep need. Its measurement of global brain activity for homeostatic sleep seems more questionable, but adenosine does accumulate throughout the wake period in P.bf [Porkka-Heiskanan et al 2000].

Inflammation peptides like IL-1β are also sleep-promoting [Imeri and Opp 2009]. In addition to their inflammation-related sleep, they seem to be part of normal homeostatic sleep signaling. In Drosophila sleep-need astrocytes produce IL-1β as a signaling peptide [Blum et al 2021]. In zebrafish, sleep deprivation correlates with immune signaling [Williams et al 2007].

Next: ignition and maintenance circuits

After this general discussion on sleep wake, the next post will cover some of the specific sleep and wake circuits, particularly those associated with wake ignition, wake maintenance and sleep maintenance.

References

Aizawa H, Cui W, Tanaka K, Okamoto H. Hyperactivation of the habenula as a link between depression and sleep disturbance. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Dec 10;7:826. 

Ashton A, Jagannath A. Disrupted Sleep and Circadian Rhythms in Schizophrenia and Their Interaction With Dopamine Signaling. Front Neurosci. 2020 Jun 23;14:636. 

Becker-Krail DD, Walker WH 2nd, Nelson RJ. The Ventral Tegmental Area and Nucleus Accumbens as Circadian Oscillators: Implications for Drug Abuse and Substance Use Disorders. Front Physiol. 2022 Apr 27;13:886704.

Blum ID, Keleş MF, Baz ES, Han E, Park K, Luu S, Issa H, Brown M, Ho MCW, Tabuchi M, Liu S, Wu MN. Astroglial Calcium Signaling Encodes Sleep Need in Drosophila. Curr Biol. 2021 Jan 11;31(1):150-162.e7. 

Borbély AA, Daan S, Wirz-Justice A, Deboer T. The two-process model of sleep regulation: a reappraisal. J Sleep Res. 2016 Apr;25(2):131-43.

Cahill GM, Besharse JC. Resetting the circadian clock in cultured Xenopus eyecups: regulation of retinal melatonin rhythms by light and D2 dopamine receptors. J Neurosci. 1991 Oct;11(10):2959-71. 

Dibner, C., Schibler, U., & Albrecht, U. (2010). The mammalian circadian timing system: organization and coordination of central and peripheral clocks. Annual review of physiology, 72, 517-549.

Edgar RS, Green EW, Zhao Y, van Ooijen G, Olmedo M, Qin X, Xu Y, Pan M, Valekunja UK, Feeney KA, Maywood ES, Hastings MH, Baliga NS, Merrow M, Millar AJ, Johnson CH, Kyriacou CP, O’Neill JS, Reddy AB. Peroxiredoxins are conserved markers of circadian rhythms. Nature. 2012 May 16;485(7399):459-64.

Gallardo CM, Darvas M, Oviatt M, Chang CH, Michalik M, Huddy TF, Meyer EE, Shuster SA, Aguayo A, Hill EM, Kiani K, Ikpeazu J, Martinez JS, Purpura M, Smit AN, Patton DF, Mistlberger RE, Palmiter RD, Steele AD. Dopamine receptor 1 neurons in the dorsal striatum regulate food anticipatory circadian activity rhythms in mice. Elife. 2014 Sep 12;3:e03781.

Gelegen C, Miracca G, Ran MZ, Harding EC, Ye Z, Yu X, Tossell K, Houston CM, Yustos R, Hawkins ED, Vyssotski AL, Dong HL, Wisden W, Franks NP. Excitatory Pathways from the Lateral Habenula Enable Propofol-Induced Sedation. Curr Biol. 2018 Feb 19;28(4):580-587.e5.

Goldstein, R. (1983). A GABAergic habenulo-raphe pathway mediation of the hypnogenic effects of vasotocin in cat. Neuroscience 10, 941–945.

Grady, S. P., Nishino, S., Czeisler, C. A., Hepner, D., & Scammell, T. E. (2006). Diurnal variation in CSF orexin-A in healthy male subjectsSleep29(3), 295-297.

Grippo RM, Purohit AM, Zhang Q, Zweifel LS, Güler AD. Direct Midbrain Dopamine Input to the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus Accelerates Circadian Entrainment. Curr Biol. 2017 Aug 21;27(16):2465-2475.e3. 

Hikosaka O. The habenula: from stress evasion to value-based decision-making. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010 Jul;11(7):503-13.

Lacalli T. An evolutionary perspective on chordate brain organization and function: insights from amphioxus, and the problem of sentience. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2022 Feb 14;377(1844):20200520.

Liu YY, Liu TY, Qu WM, Hong ZY, Urade Y, and Huang ZL (2012) Dopamine is involved in food-anticipatory activity in miceJ Biol Rhythms 27:398–409.

Luo YJ, Ge J, Chen ZK, Liu ZL, Lazarus M, Qu WM, Huang ZL, Li YD. Ventral pallidal glutamatergic neurons regulate wakefulness and emotion through separated projections. iScience. 2023 Aug 5;26(8):107385.

Mogavero MP, Godos J, Grosso G, Caraci F, Ferri R. Rethinking the Role of Orexin in the Regulation of REM Sleep and Appetite. Nutrients. 2023 Aug 22;15(17):3679.

Newcomb JM, Kirouac LE, Naimie AA, Bixby KA, Lee C, Malanga S, Raubach M, Watson WH 3rd. Circadian rhythms of crawling and swimming in the nudibranch mollusc Melibe leonina. Biol Bull. 2014 Dec;227(3):263-73. 

Pendergast JS, Yamazaki S. The Mysterious Food-Entrainable Oscillator: Insights from Mutant and Engineered Mouse Models. J Biol Rhythms. 2018 Oct;33(5):458-474.

Porkka-Heiskanen T, Strecker RE, McCarley RW. Brain site-specificity of extracellular adenosine concentration changes during sleep deprivation and spontaneous sleep: an in vivo microdialysis study. Neuroscience. 2000;99(3):507-17. 

Rial RV, Canellas F, Akaârir M, Rubiño JA, Barceló P, Martín A, Gamundí A, Nicolau MC. The Birth of the Mammalian Sleep. Biology (Basel). 2022 May 11;11(5):734. doi: 10.3390/biology11050734. 

Ruby NF, Hwang CE, Wessells C, Fernandez F, Zhang P, Sapolsky R, Heller HC. Hippocampal-dependent learning requires a functional circadian system. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Oct 7;105(40):15593-8.

Salaberry NL, Mendoza J. The circadian clock in the mouse habenula is set by catecholamines. Cell Tissue Res. 2022 Feb;387(2):261-274.

Tang Q, Assali DR, Güler AD, Steele AD. Dopamine systems and biological rhythms: Let’s get a move on. Front Integr Neurosci. 2022 Jul 27;16:957193. 

Tataroglu O, Davidson AJ, Benvenuto LJ, Menaker M. The methamphetamine-sensitive circadian oscillator (MASCO) in mice. J Biol Rhythms. 2006 Jun;21(3):185-94. 

Tosches MA, Bucher D, Vopalensky P, Arendt D. Melatonin signaling controls circadian swimming behavior in marine zooplankton. Cell. 2014 Sep 25;159(1):46-57.

Vatine G, Vallone D, Gothilf Y, Foulkes NS. It’s time to swim! Zebrafish and the circadian clock. FEBS Lett. 2011 May 20;585(10):1485-94. 

Vorster AP, Krishnan HC, Cirelli C, Lyons LC. Characterization of sleep in Aplysia californica. Sleep. 2014 Sep 1;37(9):1453-63. 

Wang F, Wang W, Gu S, Qi D, Smith NA, Peng W, Dong W, Yuan J, Zhao B, Mao Y, Cao P, Lu QR, Shapiro LA, Yi SS, Wu E, Huang JH. Distinct astrocytic modulatory roles in sensory transmission during sleep, wakefulness, and arousal states in freely moving mice. Nat Commun. 2023 Apr 17;14(1):2186. 

Yamaguchi H, Hopf FW, Li SB, de Lecea L. In vivo cell type-specific CRISPR knockdown of dopamine beta hydroxylase reduces locus coeruleus evoked wakefulness. Nat Commun. 2018 Dec 6;9(1):5211. 

Yujnovsky I, Hirayama J, Doi M, Borrelli E, Sassone-Corsi P. Signaling mediated by the dopamine D2 receptor potentiates circadian regulation by CLOCK:BMAL1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Apr 18;103(16):6386-91.

 Williams JA, Sathyanarayanan S, Hendricks JC, Sehgal A. Interaction between sleep and the immune response in Drosophila: a role for the NFkappaB relish. Sleep. 2007 Apr;30(4):389-400. 

Essay 29: sleep – oxidation [1/3]

Because sleep is a global state that suppresses senses and actions, its control circuitry affects essentially all neural systems. For example, an article on dopamine and S.v (ventral striatum aka nucleus accumbens) suggested that dopamine acts more like a wake signal than an abstract reward signal [Kazmierczak and Nicola 2022]. If that explanation is accurate, then understanding the sleep system is a prerequisite for understanding the whole system.

From the study, low dopamine caused the rodents to either fall asleep normally or collapse in cataplexy, depending on whether D1s (stimulating Gs-coupled dopamine receptor) or D2i (inhibitory Gi-coupled dopamine receptor) were disabled. Many studies omit qualitative behavior like animals falling asleep, reporting only statistical summaries of success or failure.

The Great Oxidation Event

Sleep exists for essentially all animals including primitive animals like hydra and even single celled eukaryotes. Beyond sleep, oxidation-reduction cycles exist even for bacteria. 2.5 billion years ago in the Great Oxidation Event when photosynthesis created the toxin oxygen, most life died except for like that developed defenses against oxidation and ROS (reductive oxygen species). One of these cellular defenses was an oxidation-reduction cycle to spend time repairing oxygen damage. Cellular clocks developed around these primitive, conserved oxidation-reduction cycles [Edgar et al 2012].

Mitochondria in eukaryotes produce additional toxic oxygen ROS. One general sleep theory proposes that mitochondria force sleep on their hosts to allow for repair [Hartman and Kempf 2023]. In essentially all cells the cell clock and the mitochondrial clock are in sync [Scrima et al 2016]. In this model, sleep repairs oxidation damage in a quiet, low energy mode. Mitochondria produce GABA to signal to the host cell for its sleep need [Adams and O’Brien 2023]. GABA is the main inhibitory neurotransmitter, possibly directly inhibiting the containing neuron.

In the cortex a more sophisticated system passes damaged mitochondria from neurons to astrocytes, when then modulate sleep [Haydon 2017]. Astrocytes strong coupling between sleep and neural activity is important in many brain areas. In particular, astrocytes emit sleep transmitters adenosine and GABA, and connect to neighboring astrocytes with gap junctions to integrate sleep pressure spatially and temporally. Astrocyte can emit adenosine and GABA, both sleep signals. So, sleep can’t be treated as a straight neural circuit without considering the actions of astrocytes.

Beyond the brain, metabolic cells such as the liver and even gut microflora have circadian cycles and these metabolic cycles work best when synchronized with sleep [Borbély et al 2016].

Sleep basics

While sleep in mammals can be detected by slow waves in the cortex, a more general criteria is necessary to cover insects like Drosophila and worms like C. elegans. The following properties are generally used to identify sleep:

  • Behavioral quiescence
  • Sensory inhibition
  • Sleep position

From an implementation perspective, sleep has a global coordination problem because all processes need to sleep simultaneously. In contrast, waking processes such as foraging only needs to activate task-relevant areas, and other areas can rest outside of a general sleep state. Columns in the cortex, for example, can fall into a slow wave state while the animal is awake. Although no lesion of the brain produces a wake-only state [Krueger et al 2013], so there is no single sleep center, sleep requires global coordination.

  • Inhibit the link from stimulus to response
  • Inhibit intrinsic motivation
  • Inhibit cognitive processes

Two process model of sleep

The two process model of sleep considers circadian and homeostatic as two separate processes driving sleep. In addition, the animal’s activity can postpone sleep [Yamagata et al 2021]. Circadian sleep handles the major daily sleep need while homeostatic sleep covers local sleep needs.

Criticisms of this model point out metabolic anabolic and catabolic cycles are more related to feeding cycles than light cycles [Borbély et al 2016]. The presence of cell clocks in most cells suggests that circadian isn’t a global requirement. In addition, ultradian (4h) feeding cycles cause food anticipatory activity [Dibner et al 2010].

As a specific counterexample, the snail sleep can be model well by simple stochastic oscillator between wake and quiescence [Stephenson 2011]. In contrast zooplankton follow a clear circadian migration between light and dark [Tosches et al 2014].

From a circuit perspective, the two process model has value because some areas like Hb (habenula), Po.vl (ventrolateral preoptic area), and H.scn (suprachiasmatic nucleus) are more easily understandable from a circadian perspective.

Bistable sleep and wake

Although it might sound obvious that sleep and wake are distinct states, implementing this bistable system requires coordination. Violations of this bistability are unusual, like sleepwalking. As in essay 27, where the state transition between seeking food and eating required a circuit using H.stn (subthalamic nucleus) and Snr (substantia nigra pars reticulata), the sleep and wake circuits need circuits to manage their distinction and transition.

The sleep/wake transition needs to have high gain to avoid metastability.

Clear state transitions try to avoid metastability, a transitional non-state between the target states. Metastability always exists, but can be minimized by increasing the feedback gain between the states. A high gain, tight transition minimizes the probability of a metastable state. In the mammalian brain, positive feedback and lateral inhibition in Po.vl (ventrolateral preoptic area) and H.l.ox (orexin area of lateral hypothalamus) help make the switch tighter. [Saper et al 2001] calls this a flip-flop with the similarity to bistable electrical latches, where a high gain to avoid metastability is also very important to maintain binary values with a continuous voltage.

While high gain and lateral inhibition is important for sleep, an additional concept called hysteresis is also important to create long continuous sleep bouts and avoid sleep fragmentation.

Hysteresis: sticky switches

In a naive implementation of homeostatic sleep, the animal sleeps when sleep pressure rises past a threshold, and wakes when the pressure drops. Unfortunately, this system could quickly oscillate, where a short nap of a few seconds crosses the threshold and wakes the animal, which quickly tires and takes a new nap. To avoid this fragmented sleep, the threshold needs to be sticky: it’s harder to wake when the animal sleeps, and harder to sleep when the animal wakes.

Hysteresis for sleep pressure.

This kind of sticky switch is called hysteresis. The threshold for switching states depends on the current state.

Since sleep inhibits sensory input, noises that would keep an animal awake are ignored. Since sleep inhibits actions, the animal is unlikely to run into a situation that requires action. On the other side, any ongoing action will maintain wake. The transition to sleep needs to be slow to ensure that all actions have completed. In addition, long lasting peptides like orexin from H.l can maintain wake for minutes, ensuring a minimum wake bout length.

Note that circadian sleep process is another solution to the sleep oscillation problem. Because time is inexorable, circadian sleep time also shifts the sleep threshold, making it increasingly difficult to sustain wake.

Sleep and wake asymmetry

Sleep and wake are asymmetrical, unlike a symmetrical flip-flop. Any ongoing action needs to maintain wake, and falling asleep is a slow, decaying process, but waking needs to be fast when responding to an alarm. This asymmetrical slow drop to sleep and quick rise to wake is reflected in neurotransmitter levels like dopamine [Zhang et al 2023].

In terms of circuitry, an area around R.pb (parabrachial nucleus) is required for wake. If that area is lesioned, the animal remains in a coma [Fuller et al 2011]. There is no equivalent sleep area that produces a wake-only state when lesioned [Krueger et al 2013].

Next: circadian

After the general discussion of sleep, I think exploring the circadian aspect of sleep is a good direct. Circadian sleep is an ancient system, existing in zooplankton and preexisting more complicated sleep systems.

References

Adams GJ, O’Brien PA. The unified theory of sleep: Eukaryotes endosymbiotic relationship with mitochondria and REM the push-back response for awakening. Neurobiol Sleep Circadian Rhythms. 2023 Jul 6;15:100100.

Borbély AA, Daan S, Wirz-Justice A, Deboer T. The two-process model of sleep regulation: a reappraisal. J Sleep Res. 2016 Apr;25(2):131-43. 

Dibner, C., Schibler, U., & Albrecht, U. (2010). The mammalian circadian timing system: organization and coordination of central and peripheral clocks. Annual review of physiology, 72, 517-549.

Edgar RS, Green EW, Zhao Y, van Ooijen G, Olmedo M, Qin X, Xu Y, Pan M, Valekunja UK, Feeney KA, Maywood ES, Hastings MH, Baliga NS, Merrow M, Millar AJ, Johnson CH, Kyriacou CP, O’Neill JS, Reddy AB. Peroxiredoxins are conserved markers of circadian rhythms. Nature. 2012 May 16;485(7399):459-64. 

Hartmann C, Kempf A. Mitochondrial control of sleep. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2023 Aug;81:102733.

Haydon PG. Astrocytes and the modulation of sleep. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2017 Jun;44:28-33. 

Kaźmierczak M, Nicola SM. The Arousal-motor Hypothesis of Dopamine Function: Evidence that Dopamine Facilitates Reward Seeking in Part by Maintaining Arousal. Neuroscience. 2022 Sep 1;499:64-103. 

Krueger JM, Huang YH, Rector DM, Buysse DJ. Sleep: a synchrony of cell activity-driven small network states. Eur J Neurosci. 2013 Jul;38(2):2199-209. 

Saper, C. B., Chou, T. C., & Scammell, T. E. (2001). The sleep switch: hypothalamic control of sleep and wakefulness. Trends in neurosciences, 24(12), 726-731.

Scrima R, Cela O, Merla G, Augello B, Rubino R, Quarato G, Fugetto S, Menga M, Fuhr L, Relógio A, Piccoli C, Mazzoccoli G, Capitanio N. Clock-genes and mitochondrial respiratory activity: Evidence of a reciprocal interplay. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2016 Aug;1857(8):1344-1351.

Stephenson R. Sleep homeostasis: Progress at a snail’s pace. Commun Integr Biol. 2011 Jul;4(4):446-9. 

Tosches MA, Bucher D, Vopalensky P, Arendt D. Melatonin signaling controls circadian swimming behavior in marine zooplankton. Cell. 2014 Sep 25;159(1):46-57.

Yamagata T, Kahn MC, Prius-Mengual J, Meijer E, Šabanović M, Guillaumin MCC, van der Vinne V, Huang YG, McKillop LE, Jagannath A, Peirson SN, Mann EO, Foster RG, Vyazovskiy VV. The hypothalamic link between arousal and sleep homeostasis in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Dec 21;118(51):e2101580118.

Zhang J, Peng Y, Liu C, Zhang Y, Liang X, Yuan C, Shi W, Zhang Y. Dopamine D1-receptor-expressing pathway from the nucleus accumbens to ventral pallidum-mediated sevoflurane anesthesia in mice. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2023 Nov;29(11):3364-3377.

Essay 27: Feeding state issues

The feeding essay introduced a number of issues both uncovered by the simulation and problems with the neuroscience. The simulation emphasized issues with the timing of the dwell state, where dwelling at the wrong time can inhibit search. Another issue as a bug was getting stuck switching states where roaming didn’t restart. The biggest neuroscience problem is a possible/likely massive misinterpretation of H.pstn (presubthalamic nucleus).

Dwell timing

The initial trigger for a dwell state varies between species [Dorfman et al 2020]. The simulation quickly showed why. In the current simulation, since food is a single item in the center of an odor plume, dwell could either trigger on entering the odor plume or after eating food.

Simulation where the animal dwells when entering the odor plume.

As the screenshot shows, the dwell search is counterproductive because it’s too far from the food. When dwell triggers from eating, like ladybugs eating aphids [Dorfman et al 2020], the area restricted search is more effective.

Getting stuck in a state

One programming bug happened after the animal ate, leaving the eating state, but it didn’t start the roaming state, instead remaining stuck. The roaming state didn’t recover after the eating state.

Which raises a question about a state machine model, which I’m already skeptical about as a good model of the mind. In programming, state machines can be useful because the states and transitions are enumerable, which makes them testable, because humans are good at working through lists and cases. But evolution can’t work through a list of cases, and neural circuits are not well suited to complicated mutually-exclusive state transitions.

For example, imagine a neural state machine, and consider when evolution adds a new state or a new state transition? In theory, it needs to update all the circuits for the other states to consider the new cases for the new state and new transition. Since state machines are combinatorial, each new state or transition increases complexity based on the current complexity of the state machine. Adding a state or transition to a 2-state machine is relatively simple, but adding a state or transition to a 10-state machine is much more complicated. In programming, you can work through all the new combinations and handle each case, but evolution would require new mutations for each case. It’s not impossible but becomes less likely as complexity arises.

H.pstn as misinterpreted in the essay

Essay 27 used a hypothetical H.pstn (presubthalamic nucleus) as the eating analog to H.stn (subthalamic nucleus), where each can pause actions to manage state transitions. That model treated H.pstn and H.stn as parallel modules laterally inhibiting each other. But H.pstn research has mostly found H.pstn as an inhibitory module, pausing eating for external threads or for sickness or bitterness, not as a driving force [Barbier et al 2020].

But it’s possible that H.pstn research may be preliminary, and other regions had also found negative, aversive functions to areas that later were found to have mixed function, including H.stn itself [Watson et al 2021]. Early research had assigned negative “fear”, freezing, or stopping behavior to entire regions like H.stn, M.pag.vl (periaqueductal gray, ventral-lateral), and S.a (central amygdala), but later research found a more varied behavior. These areas only appeared to be negative because a small sub-area implemented avoidance or freezing [La-Vu et al 2020]. So, it’s possible that H.pstn might have non-avoidant function, but it seems more likely that H.pstn is not an exact parallel to H.stn for eating.

H.stn is topographically ordered by motor areas and includes mouth and facial motor areas. If H.stn does perform a sustain and transition function, it might sustain and transition many/most motor areas, without a specific carve-out for feeding.

Eating-triggered dwell vs reward

A behaviorist might describe the essay, as saying that dwell is triggered by reward. I’ve been deliberately avoiding using the term reward for eating, for several reasons including those given by [Salamone and Correa 2012]. Two reasons are that the essays don’t yet have reinforcement and the meaning of “reward” is highly tied to reinforcement. A second is that reward implicitly assumes a common currency for valence, but the implementation of a common currency requires circuitry to create that currency.

Another reason raised by this essay is that eating-triggered behavior does not necessarily follow the behaviorist reward model, and specifically this essay’s eating-dependent behavior isn’t associative learning.

Suppose I use “reward-triggered dwell” instead of “eating-triggered dwell.” First, the term would be incorrect because the simulation doesn’t have an erased-source common currency “reward”. It specifically triggers from eating. Second, “reward” implies that there’s either a hedonic component (“liking”), which the simulation doesn’t have, or a motivational component, which is more complicated, because the “dwell” state is motivational.

References

Barbier, Marie, et al. A basal ganglia-like cortical–amygdalar–hypothalamic network mediates feeding behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117.27 (2020): 15967-15976.

Dorfman A, Hills TT, Scharf I. A guide to area-restricted search: a foundational foraging behaviour. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2022 Dec;97(6):2076-2089.

La-Vu MQ, Sethi E, Maesta-Pereira S, Schuette PJ, Tobias BC, Reis FMCV, Wang W, Torossian A, Bishop A, Leonard SJ, Lin L, Cahill CM, Adhikari A. Sparse genetically defined neurons refine the canonical role of periaqueductal gray columnar organization. Elife. 2022 Jun 8;11:e77115.

Salamone JD, Correa M. The mysterious motivational functions of mesolimbic dopamine. Neuron. 2012 Nov 8;76(3):470-85.

Watson GDR, Hughes RN, Petter EA, Fallon IP, Kim N, Severino FPU, Yin HH. Thalamic projections to the subthalamic nucleus contribute to movement initiation and rescue of parkinsonian symptoms. Sci Adv. 2021 Feb 5

Essay 27: model refactoring

The model required a major refactoring to properly simulate the essay.

Model update to simulate essay 27.

HindMotor

HindMotor includes the motor command areas in the hind-brain with locomotion and eating as separate modules. Locomotion models B.rs (reticulospinal motor command neurons) and B.mdd (medulla reticular neurons). Eating models parts of B.pb (parabrachial nucleus), B.nts (nucleus of the solitary tract) and B.mdd. The locomotion and eating modules do not coordinate at the hind-brain level for this model.

In this essay, HindMotor controls the random search, modulated by upstream request, and also manages action bouts. One an action starts, it continues until complete, which generally requires several simulation ticks. Because the essay model is real-time, not turn-based, actions require several simulation ticks to complete.

HindMotor locomotion commands are split between directional hints and forward movement hints, following a similar division in vertebrates. Turn modulation comes from target seeking and obstacle avoidance, either encouraging or inhibiting left vs right turns. Forward movement modulation comes from the motive core, specifically selecting between a roaming search or an area-restricted dwelling search.

MidMotor

MidMotor coordinates actions that HindMotor implements. MidMotor with sustains actions across action bouts, and manages the transition between action bouts. Because ongoing movement needs to stop before eating, MidMotor pauses eating until the animal stops.

MidMotor represents Ppt (predunculopontine nucleus), H.stn (subthalamic nucleus), OT.d (deep optic tectum), MLR (midbrain locomotor region), and T.pf (parafascicular nucleus). For this essay, Ppt and H.stn work together as a single module to sustain actions and pause upcoming actions until currently-active actions are complete.

Seek

The essay Seek is directional movement toward a specific target, the same idea as taxis (but avoiding Greek). Seek is only active with a specific directional cue, here an olfactory gradient.

Seek models Hb.m (medial habenula) and M.ip (interpeduncular nucleus), where M.ip is models as a gradient seek module like the Drosophila fan-shaped body.

CoreMotive

CoreMotive simulates the motivational core, which is primarily peptide based. In this essay, the neural areas include H.l (lateral hypothalamus), V.dr (dorsal raphe), and B.pb (parabrachial nucleus). H.l is strongly associated with all aspects of feeding and is the driving controller. V.dr expresses the dwell state, which restricts search to a small area once the animal has found food. B.pb manages eating, taste, and physical alarms that might interrupt eating.

Motive neuropeptides

Because the motive core is more broadcast neuropeptide-based than a connective circuit, the simulation includes broadcast neuropeptides as primitive motives. In this essay, the key motives are Roam (motivation to search for food, orexin), Dwell (area restricted search, serotonin), Seek (tracking a target, dopamine) and Sated (antagonizing all food search, GLP-1).

Each motive is a DecayValue, which represents a slow leaky integrator, where the decay time can be tens of seconds or longer, because neuropeptide timing can be long. To a Dwell signal might last for 20 seconds or more without requiring recurrent neural behavior to maintain the state. Since these Motives are broadcast, they can modulate any module with requiring a direct connection.

Screenshot after eating, showing multiple active motives.

The screenshot above shows several motives after the animal eats, where emojis represent the active motives. The animal is sated (pid), eating is fading (faded fork and knife), search is in dwell (magnifying glass) because the animal has just eaten, and it’s still roaming (footprints).

Essay 27: Feeding State Machine

Essay 27 returns to feeding, which essay 23 had an earlier sketch of. While the animal in earlier essays could eat while moving, like snails and worms, this essay will add the requirement of stopping before eating, which requires extra control mechanisms to manage the state transition.

A filter feeder like amphioxus, a non-vertebrate chordate that may hint at pre-vertebrate feeding, might move to find a better feeding zone, but then settles down as a static filter feeder. Tunicates, which are more closely related to vertebrates settle down permanently as adults and dissolve their brain as no longer needed. Because I want to keep the essay simple, I’m imaging something more like licking, which is more studied in rodents, as opposed to a more alien filter feeding. The main problem for the essay to introduce locomotion and eating as distinct actions.

As a contrast to further explore the idea of states and state transitions, the essays also explores the transition between roaming and dwelling: global wide-ranging search vs area restricted search. Roaming and dwelling are more amorphous motivational states as opposed to the strict motor division between moving and eating.

Feeding states

Below is a more detailed diagram of the foraging and feeding states, revolving around the core foraging task. The animal passively roams until is finds an odor cue for a food target, which starts a seek to the target. If it finds food, the animal sops and eats.

In this model, the roam state and dwell state can be separate from seeking a target, depending on the animal’s environmental niche. A seek can start in a roam state or a dwell state, and seek cues may or may not initiate dwell state. For example, dwell state might only start when the animal eats nutritious food, indicating that food is nearby.

Feeding state diagram for the essay. ach (acetylcholine neurotransmitter) agrp (hunger peptide), ARS (area restricted search), cgrp (alarm/bitter taste peptide), da (dopamine), glp-1 (satiety/sickness peptide), ox (orexin wakefulness/action peptide), set (somatostatin peptide), V.dr (dorsal raphe), 5HT (serotonin)

The diagram includes important failure states. If seeking fails, the animal gives up and leaves the area, and must ignore the last cue to avoid perseveration. If the taste is bitter or toxic, the animal rejects the food. For now, I’m postponing longer failure states like the food lacking nutritional value or causing food poisoning.

To avoid perseveration, seeking the failed cue forever, the avoid state moves the animal away from the failed cue and ignores seek cues. A more sophisticated brain could remember the failed cue for a short time, but the current essays lack short term memory.

Eating here means specifically licking or filter feeding. I’m being precise here because the simulation requires it, and more vague neuroscience terms like “reward” are often unclear about exactly what it’s relation to actual eating are.

The connection between the dwell state and serotonin is from [Flavell et al 2013], [Ji et al 2021] which founds serotonin marking the dwell state in the flatworm C. elegans, and [Marques et al 2020] finding serotonin for a zebrafish dwell (“exploit”) state.

Roaming and dwelling

Food search phases have multiple strategies, broadly divided into roaming and dwelling. Roaming is a broader, more general search without a specific area or target. Dwelling or ARS (area restricted search) is slower, with tighter turning, where the current area is believed to be more likely to have food. [Horstick et al 2017] describes dwell as four properties: reduction in travel distance, increased change in orientation, increased path complexity, and a directional bias.

For this essay, dwelling is a motivational drive not a motor command, meaning it can overlap with other motivations and doesn’t provide a strict action state requirement. For example, dwell isn’t required to seek a target, which can occur in the roaming state, for example in C. elegans [Ji et al 2021].

In the C. elegans the dwell state is associated with serotonin and the roam state with PDF (pigment dispensing factor) [Flavell et al 2013]. In zebrafish the dwell state is associated with V.dr (dorsal raphe) serotonin [Marques et al 2020], the roam state is associated with SST (somatostatin peptide) [Horstick et al 2017]. While arousal isn’t quite the same as well, [Lovett-Barron et al 2017] found SST as a low-arousal marker, while CART, ACh (acetylcholine), NE (norepinephrine), serotonin, dopamine and NPY (neuropeptide Y) as signs of high arousal.

Triggers for the dwell state depend on the animal’s species [Dorfman et al 2020]. In C. elegans, which feeds on bacteria, nutritional feedback extends the dwell state [Ben Arous et al 2009]. In some animals a food cue triggers dwell, while in others only eating nutritious food triggers dwell. In zebrafish lack of a food cue causes H.c (caudal hypothalamus) activation decay [Wee et al 2019].

Reflexive eating

This essay models reflexive eating as a hindbrain system controlled by B.pb (parabrachial nucleus) with downstream motor and sensory in B.nts (nuclei tractus solitarius), M.mdd (reticular medulla), and B.3g (trigeminal – orofacial sensorimotor). The simulation isn’t as detailed, treating the hindbrain eating as a single low-level module.

Hindbrain modules involved in reflexive eating. B.3g (trigeminal), B.mdd (reticular medulla), B.nts (nucleus tractus solitarius), B.pb (parabrachial nucleus).

This innate circuit can with without input from higher areas [Watts et al 2022]. For example if rodents lack any dopamine, they won’t move or eat and will starve even if food is near them. However, if food or water is placed at their lips, which activates the innate circuit, the rodents will eat [Rossi et al 2016].

The B.pb area also processes sweet, bitter or salt, and can reject food without requiring higher areas. The higher areas modulate B.pb behavior, such as suppressing B.pb’s innate rejection of sour when drinking lemonade.

Because the B.pb innate eating and the MLR (midbrain locomotor region) are independent, some system much coordinate switching between moving and eating.

The illusion of state machine atomicity

The feeding state diagram suggests a simple atomic transition from seeking food to eating the food, but this transition needs management from some neural circuits. For example, when braking during driving, drivers need to pay attention to the stopping distance. Braking stops a car, but the state transition isn’t a simple atomic transition. For this essay’s eating task, some neural circuit must keep track of the animal’s stopping after seeking and only allow eating when locomotion has stopped.

State transition from seeking to eating, emphasizing the stopping state. H.pstn (parasubthalamic nucleus), H.stn (subthalamic nucleus).

H.stn (subthalamic nucleus) is involved with stopping, waiting, and switching tasks [Isoda and Hikosaka 2008]. Since H.stn also receives motor efference copies via T.pf (thalamus parafascicular nucleus) and Ppt (peduncular pontine nucleus), H.stn is in a good position to manage the stopping transition and can prevent eating until the locomotion has ended. The diagrams shows H.pstn (parasubthalamic nucleus) as a parallel area for gaiting eating, following [Barbier et al 2021].

H.stn and H.pstn state transition circuit

H.stn and H.pstn are well-placed to fulfill the transitions between seeking and eating. To flesh this idea out, here’s a simplified model of the seal to eat state transition circuit.

The main action paths are horizontal: moving is from H.stn to MLR to B.rs (reticulospinal motor neurons) and eating is from H.pstn to B.nts to orofacial licking motor neurons. The rest of the circuit manages the transition between the two states.

State transition circuit for move state to eat state. B.nts (nucleus tractus solidarus), fb (feedback), H.pstn (parasubthalamic nucleus), H.stn (subthalamic nucleus), MLR (midbrain locomotor region), Snr (substantia nigra pars reticulata), T.cl (centrolateral thalamus), T.pf (parafascicular thalamus).

Control over the transition comes from S.nr (substantia nigra pars reticulata), which inhibits eating when the animal is moving, and inhibits moving while the animal is eating. To know when the animal has stopped moving, H.stn receives motor efferent copies from T.cl and T.pf (centrolateral and parafascicular thalamus, aka intralaminar). As a note, T.cl contains cerebellum output, so H.stn may receive fine-grained motor timing feedback. H.pstn receives parallel eating efferent copies from B.pb and B.nts to know when the animal has stopped eating.

This circuit has the same structure as a lateral inhibition decision circuit, but the function is about handling timing and transition, not deciding between competing options.

Note: [Shah et al 2022] suggest H.pstn is more specific to suppressing feeding for aversive situations like food poisoning or a predator threat, but not the motor control as described here.

A note on this model: the actual neural circuit isn’t as clean, parallel and logical, because evolution isn’t an intelligent designer. Furthermore, this brain region is part of the neuropeptide core, where neuropeptide broadcast-like signaling can be more important than point-to-point circuit diagrams. Specifically, the disinhibition of B.pb eating is more likely peptides from the hypothalamus, not S.nr tonic inhibition.

H.l food zone

Studies on H.l (lateral hypothalamus) show two interesting results relevant here [Jennings et al 2015]:

  • Two distinct GABA neuron populations gate eating and seeking.
  • Two distinct neuron populations are active in a food zone or outside a food zone.

The food zone neurons partially explain how H.l decides between seeking and eating. How does this animal knows when it’s reached the food? In C. elegans there are dopamine chemosensory neurons that sense when the animal passes over food bacteria, and signals the animal to slow [Sawin et al 2000]. Dopamine chemosensory neurons also signal for the animal to turn more when leaving food (dwell-like state) [Hills et al 2004]. For this essay, using B.pb and B.nts to sense nearby food seems like a reasonable simplification because the simulation animal is aquatic and aquatic taste is a chemosensory system, similar to a close-range olfaction.

Food zone modulation of seeking and eating. fz (food zone), H.l (lateral hypothalamus).

The essay uses a signal when the animal is in a food zone or not in a food zone. The food zone signal inhibits eating or seeking actions when the animal is in a non-appropriate place. The essay uses a signal from B.pb as mentioned above.

In mammals H.l receives input from more sophisticated location systems than a bare chemosensory signal, such as E.sub.d (dorsal subiculum of hippocampus), S.ls (lateral septum, which processes hippocampal output), A.bl (basolateral amygdala, highly connected to hippocampus), S.msh (medial shell striatum receiving large hippocampus input) as well as the bare B.pb as for the simulation. All these areas incorporate more complicated environmental context. When the essays start investigating environmental context, I’ll need to revisit the H.l food zone with more sophisticated input.

H.sum as driving seek

Fleshing out the drivers of the seek circuit, consider H.sum (supramammillary nucleus, aka retromammillary) and its role in exploring (roaming and seeking). [Ferrell et al 2021] study a subset of H.sum neurons that express tac1 peptide (tachykinin, aka substance-P or neurokinin). These H.sum neurons correlate highly with movement velocity, a second before the action. Since they precede action, they’re upstream in the locomotive path.

H.sum is also involved in wakefulness [Liang et al 2023], [Plaisier et al 2020], motivation [Kesner et al 2021], and specifically food motivation [Le May et al 2019], and is modulated by hunger peptides like GLP-1 [Vogel et al 2016], [López-Ferreras et al 2018].

H.sum also participates in threat avoidance [Escobedo et al 2023], but that circuit is through Poa (preoptic area) and is outside this essay, although it would be interesting if any of the downstream circuitry is shared. H.sum is also well know for its role in hippocampal theta oscillations, novelty [Chen et al 2020], temporal and spatial memory [Cui et al 2013], and social memory, although those are outside the scope of this essay.

The diagram below shows a possible explore-related path of mammalian H.sum via the tac1 neurons.

Exploration locomotion driven through H.sum. H.l (lateral hypothalamus), H.sum (supramammillary nuleus), Hb.l (lateral habenula), MLR (midbrain locomotor region), M.pag (periaqueductal gray), P.ms (medial septum), V.dr (dorsal raphe – serotonin), Vta (ventral tegmental area – dopamine)

It may be important that H.sum and Vta (ventral tegmental area) are both neighbors and H.sum includes dopamine neurons and those dopamine neurons are sometimes considered an extension of the Vta [Yetnikoff et al 2014].

The following diagram gives an extremely rough idea of the adjacency of these areas. In a smaller primitive pre-vertebrate, these might not only be neighbors but mingled earlier functionality. The diagram includes H.zi (zona incerta) because it’s a neighbor, and also because H.zi is a food-seeking area [Ye et al 2023], but I’m postponing consideration of H.zi to a future essay.

Neighbors of the lateral habenula and supramammillary nucleus. H.l (lateral hypothalamus), H.pstn (parasubthalamic nucleus), H.stn (subthalamic nucleus), H.sum (supramammillary nucleus), H.zi (zona incerta), MLR (midbrain locomotive region), Ppt (Pedunculopontine pontine nucleus), Snc (substantia nigra pars compacta – dopamine), Snr (substantia nigra pars reticulata), Vta (ventral tegmental nucleus – dopamine), ZLI (zona limitans intrathalamica).

In addition, the rostral part of Vta nearest H.sum is part of p3 in the prosomeric embryonic model, which is a source of hypothalamic cells [Kim et al 2022]. For pre-vertebrates in this essay, then, there might not be a distinct between H.sum and Vta / posterior tuberculum, particularly since the essays are currently focusing on downstream connections, not upstream dopamine to a future striatum. Zebrafish downstream dopamine circuits directly modulate locomotor movement [Ryczko et al 2020], [Reinig et al 2017]. I think it’s reasonable to simplify this circuit for now and consider H.sum as directly projecting to MLR.

State transition circuit for seek to eat

Putting these ideas together yields something like the diagram below. Like the earlier simplified diagram, horizontal paths drive core seeking and eating behavior, and other circuits manage the state transition. Seeking uses the top path from H.l to H.sum to MLR to B.rs, which produces the final locomotion. Eating uses the bottom path from H.l to H.pstn to B.nts, which controls reflexive eating.

State management circuit for seek to eat transition. B.nts (nucleus tracts solitarius), fb (feedback), fz (food zone), H.l (lateral hypothalamus), H.pstn (parasubthalamic nucleus), H.stn (subthalamic nucleus), H.sum (supramammillary nucleus), MLR (midbrain locomotor region), T.cl (centrolateral thalamus), T.pf (parafascicular thalamus).

The left contains motivational drivers. The food zone and non food zone systems restrict seeking and eating, only allowing seeking and eating in appropriate locations.

In the center H.stn and its parallel H.stn enforce a smooth transition between seeking and eating, using motor efferent copies to pause transition until active motor stops. The smooth transition creates the illusion of an atomic state transition.

As a diagram note, I’ve used red for the H.l inhibitory neurons that gate seek and eat because they’re playing the same role as Snr neurons. Technically they should be blue, if following normal essay conventions.

Modulation of eating

The eating and feeding modulation systems are complicated and overlapping, which is too detailed for this essay, but two part are interesting. First, B.pb tonically inhibits eating with the CGRP peptide to B.nts. To enable eating, H.arc (hypothalamus arcuate) disinhibits B.nts eating by sending AgRP (a hunger peptide) to B.pb [Campos et al 2016].

Modulation of reflexive eating. AgRP (a hunger peptide), B.nts (nucleus of the solitary tract), B.pb (parabrachial nucleus), CGRP (an anti-eating peptide), H.arc (hypothalamus arcuate).

Although the essays have used the disinhibition pattern before, the pattern has generally ben GABA disinhibition, while this feeding disinhibition uses peptide signaling. As mentioned above, there are many feeding-related peptides that inhibit, excite, and modulate the feeding system without using connection based synapses.

As a parallel, a drinking modulation path goes through the basal ganglia Snr and OT (optic tectum) [Rossi et al 2016]. This path though the basal ganglia and OT coordinates anticipatory licking, while the earlier B.nts path is reflexive eating.

Control of anticipatory licking. B.mdd (medulla licking motor), OT.dl (deep, lateral optic tectum), Snr.l (lateral substantia nigra pars reticulata)

Another drinking path involves S.a (central/striatal amygdala), midbrain, and hindbrain circuits [Zheng et al 2022]. M.dp (deep mesencephalic nucleus) extends licking but doesn’t initiate it. So M.dp might extend eating after tasting. Similarly B.plc extends eating [Gong et al 2020]. S.a sst (somatostatin peptide) neurons promote eating and drinking [Kim et al 2017].

Sustained eating with an amygdala circuit. B.mdd (medulla motor eating), B.pb (parabrachial nucleus), M.dp (deep mesencephalic nucleus), S.a.sst (set-expressing neurons of the central amygdala).

Another path for tasting and eating runs through S.v (ventral striatum). [Sandoval-Rodríguez et al 2023] founds S.v directly controlling feeding using hindbrain taste input to extend eating, and using hindbrain GLP-1 (anti-eating peptide) to inhibit eating. Unlike most striatum circuits, these striatum neurons project directly to the hindbrain motor areas.

Ventral striatum taste exciting and food inhibition circuit with the hindbrain. B.ap (area postrema – nutrient sensing), B.mdd (medulla motor), B.nts (nucleus of the solitary tract), B.pb (parabrachial nucleus), Sv (ventral striatum / nucleus accumbens).

Because this essay is already complicated enough, this simulation isn’t covering all of these details. For simplicity, the simulation will use a simple continuation circuit inspired by the central amygdala and postpone other control circuits for later exploration.

Simplified eating continuation circuit with the central amygdala. B.mdd (medulla motor), B.pb (parabrachial nucleus), Sa.sst (central amygdala, sst projecting neurons)

The important point for now is that eating modulation uses multiple paths, some controlled through synaptic circuits and others through broadcast motivational peptides. The system is not one or the other, but a messy combination. To model this messiness, the simulation needs to handle both systems.

References

Barbier M, Risold PY. Understanding the Significance of the Hypothalamic Nature of the Subthalamic Nucleus. eNeuro. 2021 Oct 4.

Ben Arous J, Laffont S, Chatenay D. Molecular and sensory basis of a food related two-state behavior in C. elegans. PLoS One. 2009 Oct 23;4(10):e7584. 

Campos CA, Bowen AJ, Schwartz MW, Palmiter RD. Parabrachial CGRP Neurons Control Meal Termination. Cell Metab. 2016 May 10;23(5):811-20.

Chen S, He L, Huang AJY, Boehringer R, Robert V, Wintzer ME, Polygalov D, Weitemier AZ, Tao Y, Gu M, Middleton SJ, Namiki K, Hama H, Therreau L, Chevaleyre V, Hioki H, Miyawaki A, Piskorowski RA, McHugh TJ. A hypothalamic novelty signal modulates hippocampal memory. Nature. 2020

Cui Z, Gerfen CR, Young WS 3rd. Hypothalamic and other connections with dorsal CA2 area of the mouse hippocampus. J Comp Neurol. 2013 Jun 1;521(8):1844-66. 

Dorfman A, Hills TT, Scharf I. A guide to area-restricted search: a foundational foraging behaviour. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2022 Dec;97(6):2076-2089. 

Escobedo Abraham, Holloway Salli-Ann, Votoupal Megan, Cone Aaron L, Skelton Hannah E, Legaria Alex A., Ndiokho Imeh, Floyd Tasheia, Kravitz Alexxai V., Bruchas Michael R., Norris Aaron J. (2023) Glutamatergic Supramammillary Nucleus Neurons Respond to Threatening Stressors and Promote Active Coping eLife 12:RP90972

Farrell JS, Lovett-Barron M, Klein PM, Sparks FT, Gschwind T, Ortiz AL, Ahanonu B, Bradbury S, Terada S, Oijala M, Hwaun E, Dudok B, Szabo G, Schnitzer MJ, Deisseroth K, Losonczy A, Soltesz I. Supramammillary regulation of locomotion and hippocampal activity. Science. 2021 Dec 17;374(6574):1492-1496. 

Flavell SW, Pokala N, Macosko EZ, Albrecht DR, Larsch J, and Bargmann CI (2013). Serotonin and the neuropeptide PDF initiate and extend opposing behavioral states in C. elegans. Cell 154, 1023–1035.

Gong R, Xu S, Hermundstad A, Yu Y, Sternson SM. Hindbrain Double-Negative Feedback Mediates Palatability-Guided Food and Water Consumption. Cell. 2020 Sep 17;182(6):1589-1605.e22. 

Hills T, Brockie PJ, Maricq AV (2004) Dopamine and glutamate control area-restricted search behavior in Caenorhabditis elegans. J Neurosci 24: 1217–1225

Horstick EJ, Bayleyen Y, Sinclair JL, Burgess HA. Search strategy is regulated by somatostatin signaling and deep brain photoreceptors in zebrafish. BMC Biol. 2017 Jan 26;15(1):4. 

Isoda M, Hikosaka O. Role for subthalamic nucleus neurons in switching from automatic to controlled eye movement. J Neurosci. 2008 Jul 9;28(28):7209-18.

Jennings JH, Ung RL, Resendez SL, Stamatakis AM, Taylor JG, Huang J, Veleta K, Kantak PA, Aita M, Shilling-Scrivo K, Ramakrishnan C, Deisseroth K, Otte S, Stuber GD. Visualizing hypothalamic network dynamics for appetitive and consummatory behaviors. Cell. 2015 Jan 29;160(3):516-27.

Ji N, Madan GK, Fabre GI, Dayan A, Baker CM, Kramer TS, Nwabudike I, and Flavell SW (2021). A neural circuit for flexible control of persistent behavioral states. eLife 10. 10.7554/eLife.62889.

Kesner AJ, Shin R, Calva CB, Don RF, Junn S, Potter CT, Ramsey LA, Abou-Elnaga AF, Cover CG, Wang DV, Lu H, Yang Y, Ikemoto S. Supramammillary neurons projecting to the septum regulate dopamine and motivation for environmental interaction in mice. Nat Commun. 2021 May 14;12(1):2811.

Kim J, Zhang X, Muralidhar S, LeBlanc SA, Tonegawa S. Basolateral to Central Amygdala Neural Circuits for Appetitive Behaviors. Neuron. 2017 Mar 22;93(6):1464-1479.e5.

Kim DW, Place E, Chinnaiya K, Manning E, Sun C, Dai W, Groves I, Ohyama K, Burbridge S, Placzek M, Blackshaw S. Single-cell analysis of early chick hypothalamic development reveals that hypothalamic cells are induced from prethalamic-like progenitors. Cell Rep. 2022 Jan 18;38(3):110251.

Le May MV, Hume C, Sabatier N, Schéle E, Bake T, Bergström U, Menzies J, Dickson SL. Activation of the rat hypothalamic supramammillary nucleus by food anticipation, food restriction or ghrelin administration. J Neuroendocrinol. 2019 Jul;31(7):e12676.

Liang M, Jian T, Tao J, Wang X, Wang R, Jin W, Chen Q, Yao J, Zhao Z, Yang X, Xiao J, Yang Z, Liao X, Chen X, Wang L, Qin H. Hypothalamic supramammillary neurons that project to the medial septum modulate wakefulness in mice. Commun Biol. 2023 Dec 12;6(1):1255. 

López-Ferreras L, Eerola K, Mishra D, Shevchouk OT, Richard JE, Nilsson FH, Hayes MR, Skibicka KP. GLP-1 modulates the supramammillary nucleus-lateral hypothalamic neurocircuit to control ingestive and motivated behavior in a sex divergent manner. Mol Metab. 2019 Feb;20:178-193. 

Lovett-Barron M, Andalman AS, Allen WE, Vesuna S, Kauvar I, Burns VM, Deisseroth K. Ancestral Circuits for the Coordinated Modulation of Brain State. Cell. 2017 Nov 30;171(6):1411-1423.e17.

Marques JC, Li M, Schaak D, Robson DN, Li JM. Internal state dynamics shape brainwide activity and foraging behaviour. Nature. 2020 Jan;577(7789):239-243.

Plaisier F, Hume C, Menzies J. Neural connectivity between the hypothalamic supramammillary nucleus and appetite- and motivation-related regions of the rat brain. J Neuroendocrinol. 2020 Feb;32(2):e12829.

 Reinig S, Driever W, Arrenberg AB. The Descending Diencephalic Dopamine System Is Tuned to Sensory Stimuli. Curr Biol. 2017 Feb 6;27(3):318-333. 

Rossi MA, Basiri ML, Liu Y, Hashikawa Y, Hashikawa K, Fenno LE, Kim YS, Ramakrishnan C, Deisseroth K, Stuber GD. Transcriptional and functional divergence in lateral hypothalamic glutamate neurons projecting to the lateral habenula and ventral tegmental area. Neuron. 2021 Dec 1;109(23):3823-3837.e6. 

Ryczko D, Grätsch S, Alpert MH, Cone JJ, Kasemir J, Ruthe A, Beauséjour PA, Auclair F, Roitman MF, Alford S, Dubuc R. Descending Dopaminergic Inputs to Reticulospinal Neurons Promote Locomotor Movements. J Neurosci. 2020 Oct 28;40(44):8478-8490.

Sandoval-Rodríguez R, Parra-Reyes JA, Han W, Rueda-Orozco PE, Perez IO, de Araujo IE, Tellez LA. D1 and D2 neurons in the nucleus accumbens enable positive and negative control over sugar intake in mice. Cell Rep. 2023 Mar 28;42(3):112190. 

Sawin ER, Ranganathan R, Horvitz HR (2000) C. elegans locomotory rate is modulated by the environment through a dopaminergic pathway and by experience through a serotonergic pathway. Neuron 26: 619–631 

Shah T, Dunning JL, Contet C. At the heart of the interoception network: Influence of the parasubthalamic nucleus on autonomic functions and motivated behaviors. Neuropharmacology. 2022 Feb 15;204:108906.

Vogel H, Wolf S, Rabasa C, Rodriguez-Pacheco F, Babaei CS, Stöber F, Goldschmidt J, DiMarchi RD, Finan B, Tschöp MH, Dickson SL, Schürmann A, Skibicka KP. GLP-1 and estrogen conjugate acts in the supramammillary nucleus to reduce food-reward and body weight. Neuropharmacology. 2016 Nov;110(Pt A):396-406.

Watts AG, Kanoski SE, Sanchez-Watts G, Langhans W. The physiological control of eating: signals, neurons, and networks. Physiol Rev. 2022 Apr 1;102(2):689-813. 

Wee CL, Song EY, Johnson RE, Ailani D, Randlett O, Kim JY, Nikitchenko M, Bahl A, Yang CT, Ahrens MB, Kawakami K, Engert F, Kunes S. A bidirectional network for appetite control in larval zebrafish. Elife. 2019 Oct 18;8:e43775. 

Ye Q, Nunez J, Zhang X. Zona incerta dopamine neurons encode motivational vigor in food seeking. Sci Adv. 2023 Nov 15;9(46):eadi5326.

Yetnikoff L, Lavezzi HN, Reichard RA, Zahm DS. An update on the connections of the ventral mesencephalic dopaminergic complex. Neuroscience. 2014 Dec 12;282:23-48.

Zheng D, Fu JY, Tang MY, Yu XD, Zhu Y, Shen CJ, Li CY, Xie SZ, Lin S, Luo M, Li XM. A Deep Mesencephalic Nucleus Circuit Regulates Licking Behavior. Neurosci Bull. 2022 Jun;38(6):565-575. 

Essay 26 issues: olfactory attention

Unsurprisingly since essay 26 was a first cut at selective attention, it exposed a number of problems with both the neuroscience and the simulation model itself.

Specific give up

The current give up circuit is a global circuit, which doesn’t depend on the current stimulus. For this essay, the animal has two potential and because the give up is global, when the animal gives up, it gives up on both odors.

Global give-up circuit for olfactory seek.
Global give-up circuit for olfactory seek. H.l lateral hypothalamus, Hb.l lateral habenula, Vdr dorsal raphe, 5HT serotonin.

An improvement would be a cue-specific give up capability. When the animal gives up on odor A, it should investigate odor B. Instead it gives up on both. I need to add some mechanism to create a cue-specific give up capability.

As a possible neural analog, the adenosine receptor can work as a local give-up circuit by integrating neural activity. Since adenosine is essentially a waste produce from neural activity, long activity will accumulate adenosine. The A1 adenosine receptor detects the adenosine and inhibits activity, since it’s a Gi receptor.

Olfactory complexity and attention

The essay’s odor model is extremely oversimplified, because odor receptors are feature detectors, not molecule receptors, and odors are combinations of molecules. Since a specific odor is a combination of features, P.bf (basal forebrain) can’t be a simple winner-take-all inhibitory circuit as implemented in this essay. Instead, attention needs to be a set of features that excludes the distractor odor’s features.

Olfactory gamma and beta

Although the essay treats the olfactory bulb data as direct signals, oscillations are a major feature of the olfactory bulb. Strong odors trigger gamma (40-100Hz) signals in Omt (mitral/tufted output cells), enhanced by ACh (acetylcholine) from P.bf. Feedback from O.pir (olfactory piriform cortex) triggers beta (15-30Hz) oscillations. In addition, interactions with breathing in mammals synchronized with theta (4-10Hz). Although, in the last case, since the simulation animal is aquatic, breathing isn’t an appropriate synchronizer.

Temporal gradient seek issues

Odor seeking in essay 26 uses temporal gradient descent modulated by head direction in Hb.m (medial habenula) and B.ip (interpeduncular nucleus). The animal combines its head direction with the temporal gradient to estimate the odor direction, and it saves the result as a goal vector. As the animal turns, it can improve the direct estimate. In the phototaxis example of essay 25, the saved goal vector direction helped with intermittent data, where it could remember the light location for a few seconds.

Problems with the current odor direction. A quick switch in location incorporates data from the old direction, leading to an incorrect estimate.

However, the system as implemented in the model is extremely limited. It can’t truly triangulate to locate the odor, but can only improve the single direction. In the diagram above, the animal can only select one of the two vectors as an estimate. It can’t combine the two into a better estimate of the center. Also, in the diagram, the earlier estimate is no longer useful because the animal has moved.

Now, the issue might be purely in the simulation. If B.ip and Vdr (dorsal raphe serotonin) are calculating this kind of estimate, it’s likely their computation is better than the current simulation.

The selection is a trade off where a stronger gradient is likely a better estimate, but if the animal moves too far from the earlier sample, the old direction is no longer relevant. Since the animal lacks the sophistication of an allocentric map to resolve the discrepancy, it discards the old value.

The current implementation decays the old estimate to allow newer estimates to overwrite it even if the later gradient is weaker. Essentially the memory is like a leaky integrator, as is appropriate for placing it in the serotonin neurons and/or associate glia with short term (5s) memory as in simple zebrafish motor memory [Dragomir et al 2020].

Bayesian updates

In a future essay, it might be interesting to explore this issue to see if a simple Bayesian system could be implemented in low-complexity circuits, where stronger data would update the current model more than the current model.

Self motion and gradient vectors

When the animal is turning, the running average no longer represents a straight line. For the gradient vector, the system assumes the recent average was measured along the current head direction, but turns violate this assumption. To avoid miscalculating gradient vectors, the animal should suppress measurement during turns.

Swimming and theta

The gradient seek issues above are compounded with swimming with a fixed head. Early vertebrates would have had a fixed head like sharks, meaning that each swimming stroke would move the head from side to side. That sideways movement would affect the odor gradient and head direction.

Inconsistent head vs body direction and odor measurement while swimming with a fixed head.

A simplistic fix would take an odor gradient sample only on each swim stroke, only reporting at the stroke end for consistency and to average from the beginning of the stroke to the end. That solution would give a consistent measurement in a reasonably consistent direction, as opposed to sampling randomly in a cycle.

Log encoding vs linear encoding

For simplicity, I’e used linear encoding for signals in the essays, because the basic functional architecture remains the same, and the simulation isn’t precise enough to need more complexity. But for odors, the dynamic range between a single molecule detection and an overpowering odor doesn’t scale well with a linear representation.

In particular, the odor weight from the simple distance gradient, together with above mentioned temporal gradient issues might be better modeled with a log signal. Basically, the issue I raised above with gradient vector sampling might be more tractable with a different encoding, and log encoding might make the actual neural circuit less finicky than the current linear model.

Seek mode switching

The essay’s simulation lacks a specific mode switching circuit. In vertebrates the peptide core (hypothalamus, PAG, B.pb area) switches action modes from roaming to seek to eating to rest and sleep. These modes are motivated and depend on internal needs and scheduling impulses programmed by evolution.

References

Dragomir EI, Štih V, Portugues R. Evidence accumulation during a sensorimotor decision task revealed by whole-brain imaging. Nat Neurosci. 2020 Jan;23(1):85-93.

Essay 26: Ignoring distracting odors

I’ve been ignoring distracting cues in the previous essays for simplification. Since the simulated animal only encountered a single odor at a time, it never needed to select one and ignore the other. In essay 26, I’ll implement a very simple first approximation to ignoring distractors, using the P.bf (basal forebrain) control of the Ob (olfactory bulb) as a switchboard to let the selected odor through and inhibit the ignored distractor.

Simulated animal (triangle) encountering two odor plumes (circles).

In the diagram above, the animal (triangle) is seeking food using the purple odor cue as a gradient direction. When it encounters the distractor odor in blue, it should ignore the distractor, otherwise the two odors will mingle into an incorrect summed gradient and the animal will seek in the wrong direction [Cisek 2022].

Temporal chemotaxis

For essay 26, I’m switching chemotaxis (odor seeking) to use the apical temporal gradient search, using Hb.m (medial habenula) and B.ip (interpeduncular nucleus) like the phototaxis in essay 24. The apical system follows the chimera brain model of [Tosches and Arendt 2013], which suggests that odor senses and actions are distinct systems from bilateral tactile senses. For the essays, the shift is from a bilateral, Braitenberg-like [Braitenberg 1984] system to a modulated random walk like the bacterial tumble-and-run.

Olfactory tumble-and-run system using Hb.m and B.ip for temporal gradient direction, and B.rs for the modulated random walk. B.ip interpeduncular nucleus, B.rs hindbrain reticulospinal motor area, Hb.m medial habenula, Ob olfactory bulb.

The above diagram shows the problem with distractor odors. Because the tumble-and-run system uses a single temporal gradient, it necessarily adds both odors together for its input. The summed input goes to the Hb.m (medial habenula) and B.ip (interpeduncular nucleus) system to modulate the random walk direction.

When the animal crosses into the overlapping distractor odor, it will follow the combined signal, distracted from the original seek target. To avoid distraction, the system can either amplify the current odor A, or inhibit the distractors like odor B.

Analogy with nucleus isthmi

An earlier essay 19 also had an attention / distractor problem, with a different issue of action consistency, and used a zebrafish circuit in P.ni (nucleus isthmi) as a solution. In larval zebrafish P.ni works together with OT (optic tectum) to sustain attention on prey during a hunt [Henriques et al 2019]. P.ni is an ACh (acetylcholine neurotransmitter) and GABA (inhibiting neurotransmitter) system that both amplifies the predicted prey location and inhibits surrounding areas.

Nucleus isthmi circuit as adapted by essay 19. ACh acetylcholine, OT optic tectum, Pni nucleus isthmi.

In the above diagram for the essay 19 circuit, a simultaneous left and right touch would select one action at random and sustain that choice for subsequent movement with the P.ni positive feedback circuit. The outputs are crossed because it’s an avoidance circuit: an obstacle on the left triggers a right turn.

Importantly, the positive feedback is modulatory; it doesn’t trigger an action by itself. At a synapse level, ACh triggers mAChR (ACh metabotropic receptor, Gs stimulatory type) on the sensor axon, amplifying the sensor’s neurotransmitter release. The ACh and mAChR act as the decay timer, because they have a slow time constant on the order of a few seconds. If the sensor doesn’t stimulate the circuit, as when successfully avoiding the obstacle, the attention will decay over a few seconds, resetting the system to its original state.

A similar function applies to Ob and P.bf (basal forebrain), where P.bf acts like P.ni to sustain attention to the selected odor. “Basal forebrain” is a general name for a collection of functionally-related subcortical areas in the ventral (“basal”) forebrain, all pallidal-like (P). The specific P areas for the Ob are P.hdb (horizontal diagonal band) and Po.me (magnocellular preoptic area), but I’ll use P.bf for simplicity.

Olfactory bulb as a switchboard

In this model, Ob acts like a switchboard controlled by P.bf. P.bf selects attended odor paths in Ob, where Ob either passes the odor signal to its destination or inhibits the signal if it’s a distractor. P.bf opens and closes gated circuits in Ob.

Although the architecture of the Ob and P.bf circuit resembles the P.ni circuit, Ob appears to rely more heavily on inhibitory GABA for the gating operation, although ACh is also important [Böhm et al 2020], [de Saint Jan et al 2020], [Nunez-Parra et al 2000]. Since this essay is a first cut, simplified model, I’m using a single signal that represents a gating attention / inhibition signal, and glossing over the ACh vs GABA distinction.

Olfactory bulb switchboard using basal forebrain to gate selected odors. B.ip interpeduncular nucleus, B.rs reticulospinal motor, Hb.m medial habenula, Omt mitral/tufted output cells, Osn olfactory sensor neurons, P.bf basal forebrain.

In the above diagram where the switchboard selects odor A and inhibits odor B, the apical seek circuit receives only odor A’s signal. P.bf gates odors from Osn (olfactory sensory neurons) to Omt (mitral/tufted output cells), which then add to form a single signal for the temporal gradient tumble-and-run seek. For simplicity, I’ve shown the P.bf ACh and GABA signal as a simple gating control.

Once the system detects odor A, P.bf configures the switchboard to pass through A and inhibit other odors, locking out the distractor. Because the selecting signals are modulators, they don’t drive a signal until an odor signal arrives. Like the P.ni circuit, attention will timeout as ACh and its slow mACh receptor decay. When the animal leaves the odor plume, the system resets because the absence of odor A collapses the feedback loop.

Although the essay’s switchboard is an improvement over the naive summation of odor signals, it’s still quite limited. There’s no active selection of a best odor, and the system can’t switch to a better odor cue. Also, since the global give-up circuit isn’t integrated with P.bf, giving up on odor A can’t select odor B. Instead the animal must leave the plume and reset the system.

Slightly more complete Ob switchboard

The Ob is a surprisingly complex system; it’s not just a simple odor system. In addition to the P.bf, Opir (olfactory piriform cortex) also modulates the Ob system, and Ob itself has lateral inhibition between Omt (mitral cell output), which is plastic, learning to discriminate odors itself, as well as modulatory input from the serotonin and noradrenaline system.

In the real Ob, many Osn for the same odor feed into a single Ogl (olfactory glomeruli), which provides input to several Omt, all representing the same odor. Each odor feature has its own Ogl system, several hundred in mammals (two in the essay simulation). Ogl is where the neuropil of the Osn axons meet the Omt dendrites, in a fan-in to fan-out system. Also, each Ogl has many inhibitory Opg (periglomerular inhibitors) with multiple variations, and each Omt has several inhibitory Ogc (olfactory granule cells). The basic fan-in and fan-out structure looks like the following diagram.

Olfactory bulb glomerule fan-in and fan-out system. Bip interpeduncular nucleus, B.rs reticulospinal motor, Hb.m medial habenula, Ogc olfactory granule cell inhibitor, Ogl olfactory glomerule, Omt olfactory mitral/tufted output, Opg olfactory periglomerular inhibitor, Osn olfactory sensor neuron.

The switchboard diagram below focuses on the ACh and GABA control from P.bf. It combines multiple Osn, Opg, Omt and Ogc into single items.

Partial olfactory bulb switchboard circuit. B.ip interpeduncular nucleus, B.rs reticulospinal motor, Hb.m medial habenula, Ogc olfactory granule cell, Ogl olfactory glomeruli, Omt olfactory mitral/tufted output, Opg olfactory periglomerular inhibitor, Opir olfactory piriform cortex, Osn olfactory sensory neuron.

To break down the diagram, the core of the switchboard circuit is the Osn to Ogl to Omt to output path; everything else is gating to select or inhibit the signal.

Odor gating happens in two locations: modulating Omt’s input dendrite tree in Ogl by Opg and modulating Omt’s output by Ogc (olfactory granular cell). Because each Omt’s input Ogl is shared for several Omt, the Opg inhibition likely affects many or all Omt for a single Ogl. In contrast, the Ogc inhibition is individual, and the Omt and Ogc circuit creates and manages gamma oscillations, which amplifies and reduces noise from the signal.

Although I’m not planning on touching cortical areas for many essays, the Opir (olfactory piriform cortex) modules the Ob switchboard in a similar circuit as B.pf with some difference. Since the Opir input to the many Ogc and many Ogl is not odor selective [Boyd et al 2015], Ogc must learn the meaning of the Opir input through plasticity.

Global give-up circuit

The essay’s task engagement and give-up circuit currently uses H.l (lateral hypothalamus) and Hb.l (lateral habenula) with V.dr (dorsal raphe serotonin) [Hikosaka 2010], [Chowdhury and Yamanaka 2016]. When a seek fails Hb.l suppresses H.l, H.l ends seek, and the animal moves on [Post et al 2022].

Global give-up circuit. H.l lateral hypothalamus, Hb.l lateral habenula, V.dr dorsal raphe, 5HT serotonin.

Because the global give-up circuit is entirely disconnected from the olfactory selective attention from the essay, giving up means giving up on all odors, not just the current attended odor.

Simulation

For this essay, I refactored much of the simulation code to clean up ideas from previous essays. A new hindbrain module manages the main locomotion like the zebrafish hindbrain motor area [Dunn et al 2016], which is possibly different from the tetrapod / amniote locomotion in the midbrain. Because the essay animal is currently more primitive than amniotes, this simplification seemed appropriate and makes the code organization more clear.

Olfactory locomotion is now random-walk based following apical tumble-and-run, as opposed to the earlier bilateral path through Vta (ventral tegmental area / posterior tuberculum) and OT (tectum). In zebrafish both paths exist, which I might explore later, but this essay is restricted to the apical temporal gradient search.

The seek mode now slows the animal and adjusts the Levy walk parameters to simulate ARS (area restricted search). As I’ll cover in the problems section, switching to seek mode is still hardcoded.

I split the habenula seek from habenula give-up (Hb.m from Hb.l) and pulled the gradient seek and head direction from B.ip into the habenula seek. Conceptually, the habenula seek code now represents Hb.m and B.ip as a single complex.

Simulated odor seeking with target attention and distractor inhibition.

In the screenshot above, the animal is making a u-turn to return to the food when the odor gradient (blue semicircle) is opposite the head direction (black semicircle). In the upper right, the green box outlined in red represents the attended green odor signal, while the white box outline in blue represents the suppressed blue odor. Despite the Osn naively sensing both blue and green odors because the animal is in the overlap area, only the green odor passes through Omt to the seek system.

The square borders around the odor color represent P.bf modulation. Red is attended (100% pass through), blue is inhibited (10% pass through), and grey is unmodulated (50% pass through).

In the diamond-shaped homunculus, the bright blue triangle represents the u-turn nudge.

As the goal vector shows, the guessed goal direction isn’t very accurate, particularly when the animal is making a turn. Currently, the animal continues to update its guess even in the middle of a turn when the odor data and averages are not appropriate for the current direction.

References

Böhm E, Brunert D, Rothermel M. Input dependent modulation of olfactory bulb activity by HDB GABAergic projections. Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 1;10(1):10696. 

Boyd AM, Kato HK, Komiyama T, Isaacson JS. Broadcasting of cortical activity to the olfactory bulb. Cell Rep. 2015 Feb 24;10(7):1032-9.

Braitenberg, V. (1984). Vehicles: Experiments in synthetic psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. “Vehicles – the MIT Press”

Chowdhury S, Yamanaka A. Optogenetic activation of serotonergic terminals facilitates GABAergic inhibitory input to orexin/hypocretin neurons. Sci Rep. 2016;6:36039

Cisek P. Evolution of behavioural control from chordates to primates. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2022 Feb 14

De Saint Jan D. Target-specific control of olfactory bulb periglomerular cells by GABAergic and cholinergic basal forebrain inputs. Elife. 2022 Feb 28;11:e71965.

Dunn, Timothy, Yu Mu, Sujatha Narayan, Owen Randlett, Eva A Naumann, Chao-Tsung Yang, Alexander F Schier, Jeremy Freeman, Florian Engert, Misha B Ahrens (2016) Brain-wide mapping of neural activity controlling zebrafish exploratory locomotion eLife 5:e12741

Henriques PM, Rahman N, Jackson SE, Bianco IH. Nucleus Isthmi Is Required to Sustain Target Pursuit during Visually Guided Prey-Catching. Curr Biol. 2019 Jun 3;29(11):1771-1786.e5. 

Hikosaka O. The habenula: from stress evasion to value-based decision-making. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010 Jul;11(7):503-13. 

Nunez-Parra A, Cea-Del Rio CA, Huntsman MM, Restrepo D. The Basal Forebrain Modulates Neuronal Response in an Active Olfactory Discrimination Task. Front Cell Neurosci. 2020 Jun 5;14:141. 

Post RJ, Bulkin DA, Ebitz RB, Lee V, Han K, Warden MR. Tonic activity in lateral habenula neurons acts as a neutral valence brake on reward-seeking behavior. Curr Biol. 2022 Oct 24;32(20):4325-4336.e5.

Tosches, Maria Antonietta, and Detlev Arendt. The bilaterian forebrain: an evolutionary chimaera. Current opinion in neurobiology 23.6 (2013): 1080-1089.

Essay 25: head direction gradients

Essay 24, which investigated temporal gradient navigation, raised the question of head direction and navigation. The essay 24 model followed a zebrafish phototaxis experiment by [Chen and Engert 2014] which created a virtual light spot surrounded by darkness. The phototaxis behavior used Hb.m (medial habenula) and B.ip (interpeduncular nucleus) path using 5HT (serotonin) from V.mr (median raphe) as an average integrator [Cheng et al 2016] to generate the gradient without using head direction. Since B.ip receives head direction input [Petrucco et al 2023], essay 25 explores using head direction with the phototaxis gradient.

In the fruit fly drosophila, head direction and goal direction combine in the fan-shaped body to produce motor commands toward the goal [Matheson et al 2022]. Since the vertebrate B.ip connectivity with head direction resembles the fan-shaped body, this essay will use it as a model.

B.ip connectivity

Head direction from B.dtg (dorsal tegmental nucleus of Gudden) and the photo-gradient input from Hb.m would combine in tabular rows and columns in B.ip, if it resembles the fan-shaped body.

B.ip connectivity following a fan-shaped body model. B.dtg dorsal tegmental nucleus of Gudden, B.ip interpeduncular nucleus, B.rs reticulospinal motor command, Hb.m medial habenula.

Head direction encoding

Head direction is necessarily encoded by neurons. Each neuron in the head direction population has a specific direction, and fires when the animal is heading toward the neuron’s preferred direction.

Head direction encoding. Each neuron (colored box) corresponds to a direction. The neuron in the current direction is active, while other directions are silent.

In general, the heading is encoded is an ensemble of neurons, where several neurons around the actual direction fire at different rates (or possibly delayed phases). In the diagram above, the central direction (blue) has a higher activity while neighboring neurons have smaller values [Petrucco et al 2023].

Drosophila uses a coding for its head direction, where the amplitude of the actual direction neuron is close to one and the neurons at orthogonal directions are zero [Westeinde et al 2022]. This sinusoidal encoding enables neuron-friendly transformations and combinations [Touretzky et al 1993] with advantages over neural rate-encoding or phase encoding, particularly in response speed.

Fan-shaped body: allocentric to egocentric

Fruit fly navigation uses its fly-shaped body to combine an allocentric goal direction with the head direction to create motor commands to turn left or right. Egocentric is self-focused and allocentric is other-focused. Allocentric coordinates are animal-independent like North or toward a distant landmark, which egocentric coordinates are relative to the animal, like forward, right or left.

The fan-shaped body has a tabular shape where each column is a head direction and each row is a goal input [Hulse et al 2021]. The fan-shaped body combines the goal vector and the head direction to create motor commands [Westeinde et al 2022].

The fan-shaped body combines head direction with goal vectors to produce motor commands.

By shifting the head direction and combining the sinusoidal encodings of the goal vector, the motor output is a turn toward left or right. In drosophila, there’s a third motor command for a U-turn when the goal is behind the fly. Each motor command is carried by a specific neuron: PFL2.L (left), PFL2.R (right), and PFL3 (U-turn).

In drosophila, there are 18 distinct head direction columns and up to 9 goal rows. The fan-shaped body is also used for motivation calculations like sleep, despite sleep not fitting into the strict tabular model shown above. To create the strict organization, the fan-shaped body has 400 distinct neuron types [Hulse et al 2021].

Constructing goal vectors

In the phototaxis situation as in essay 24 or [Chen and Engert 2014] the goal vector is constructed from the gradient as the animal enters darkness from light and the head direction at that moment.

Captured goal vector (red) when the animal crosses into darkness.

As the diagram above suggests, the stored vector isn’t the true direction from light to dark, but only the sample along the animal’s path. The gradient value is then stored in the goal direction cells.

Storing the goal vector requires gating based on head direction. In zebrafish, serotonin accumulators can be gated by actions and used as a short term memory (5s – 20s) [Kawashima et al 2016]. For the essay, head dir gates serotonin accumulation as a replacement for the action gating.

Storing gradient into the goal vector based on the current goal. The red direction (south-east) gates its associated serotonin accumulator.

Since V.mr (median raphe) neurons produce consistent tonic oscillations, they are ideal for reading the accumulated value. No additional circuitry for the read is necessary.

Essay simulation

Because the essay model is a functional level, not a circuit level, it can use a directional vector encoding: a pair of floating-point numbers for direction and gradient for strength.

The simulation also calculated two averages: a short-term average for the goal vector gradient and a long-term average for phototaxis gradient motivation. The goal vector average needs to be shorter to avoid bleed-over from a previous direction.

Screenshot of animal crossing into darkness.

The above screenshot shows the animal’s state when it crosses into darkness. The long-timescale motivational gradient (“gr/grad”) is negative, driving the animal to avoid darkness. The short directional gradient (“sa”) is near zero, avoiding update of the stored goal vector. (Note: gradients are 0.5-centered for graphing consistency.)

The homunculus diamond in the upper right shows the current head direction (black semicircle pointing north-east) and the avoidance goal vector (orange semi-circle pointing east). Since the animal is heading toward the avoidance direction, it has a U-turn motor command (orange triangle at top). In addition, since the goal vector and head direction are near a right angle, right turns are inhibited (red at lower right). Because locomotion remains exploratory and stochastic, inhibits reduce turn probability but don’t force turns.

Discussion

This essay’s model is more speculative even compared to other essays, because I haven’t found any papers reporting in B.ip head direction behavior other than the base existence of head direction afferents [Petrucco et al 2023]. In particular, the drosophila fan-shaped body is not homologous to B.ip because the pre-vertebrate animal amphioxus lacks either structure. Nevertheless, it’s interesting that a goal gradient vector circuit is at least possible and relatively simple.

Specifically, the goal vector provides an evolutionary step toward hippocampal (E.hc) object vector cells and grid cells, because those are relatively small enhancements over the goal vector. Without a Bi.ip goal vector system as an intermediary step, hippocampal navigation is too big of an evolutionary step with too many concurrent requirements to be likely.

Note that the hippocampal system is strongly connected with the Hb, B.ip, V.mr, B.dtg system from this essay. E.hc (hippocampus), P.ms (medial septum), Hb (habenula), B.ip (interpeuncular nucleus), V.mr (median raphe), B.dtg (head direction) form a strong connected system together with H.sum (supramammilary/ retromammilary nucleus).

References

Chen X, Engert F. Navigational strategies underlying phototaxis in larval zebrafish. Front Syst Neurosci. 2014 Mar 25;8:39.

Cheng RK, Krishnan S, Jesuthasan S. Activation and inhibition of tph2 serotonergic neurons operate in tandem to influence larval zebrafish preference for light over darkness. Sci Rep. 2016 Feb 12;6:20788.

Hulse, B. K., Haberkern, H., Franconville, R., Turner-Evans, D., Takemura, S. Y., Wolff, T., … & Jayaraman, V. (2021). A connectome of the Drosophila central complex reveals network motifs suitable for flexible navigation and context-dependent action selection. Elife, 10.

Kawashima T, Zwart MF, Yang CT, Mensh BD, Ahrens MB. The Serotonergic System Tracks the Outcomes of Actions to Mediate Short-Term Motor Learning. Cell. 2016 Nov 3;167(4):933-946.e20. 

Matheson, A. M., Lanz, A. J., Medina, A. M., Licata, A. M., Currier, T. A., Syed, M. H., & Nagel, K. I. (2022). A neural circuit for wind-guided olfactory navigation. Nature Communications, 13(1), 4613.

Petrucco L, Lavian H, Wu YK, Svara F, Štih V, Portugues R. Neural dynamics and architecture of the heading direction circuit in zebrafish. Nat Neurosci. 2023 May;26(5):765-773. 

Touretzky, D. S., Redish, A. D., & Wan, H. S. (1993). Neural representation of space using sinusoidal arrays. Neural Computation, 5(6), 869-884.

Westeinde Elena A., Emily Kellogg, Paul M. Dawson, Jenny Lu, Lydia Hamburg, Benjamin Midler, Shaul Druckmann, Rachel I. Wilson (2022). Transforming a head direction signal into a goal-oriented steering command. bioRxiv 2022.11.10.516039;