| Literature DB >> 31097780 |
Shigenori Inagaki1,2, Masakazu Agetsuma3,4, Shinya Ohara5, Toshio Iijima5, Hideo Yokota6, Tetsuichi Wazawa3, Yoshiyuki Arai3, Takeharu Nagai7,8.
Abstract
Electrophysiological field potential dynamics have been widely used to investigate brain functions and related psychiatric disorders. Considering recent demand for its applicability to freely moving subjects, especially for animals in a group and socially interacting with each other, here we propose a new method based on a bioluminescent voltage indicator LOTUS-V. Using our fiber-free recording method based on the LOTUS-V, we succeeded in capturing dynamic change of brain activity in freely moving mice. Because LOTUS-V is the ratiometric indicator, motion and head-angle artifacts were not significantly detected. Taking advantage of our method as a fiber-free system, we further succeeded in simultaneously recording from multiple independently-locomotive mice that were freely interacting with one another. Importantly, this enabled us to find that the primary visual cortex, a center of visual processing, was activated during the interaction of mice. This methodology may further facilitate a wide range of studies in neurobiology and psychiatry.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31097780 PMCID: PMC6522513 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-43897-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Electrophysiological characterization of LOTUS-V in hippocampal neurons. (A; left) A representative bioluminescence image of a cultured hippocampal neuron expressing LOTUS-V. (A; right) An expanded image of the region within the square on the image on the left. (B) Plot of fractional ΔR/R0 versus voltage changes (n = 4 cells). The ΔR/R0 from −120 mV to + 80 mV was 5.3 ± 0.3%. The effective valence (Z) was 0.7, while the V1/2 was −45.5 mV. The plot was fitted using a Boltzmann function. (C) The Venus and NLuc signals (ΔL/L0), and their ratio (ΔR/R0), in response to voltage changes from the holding voltage (−70 mV to + 30 mV; n = 5 cells). (C; table) The fast and slow components, and their fraction of time constant. The activation and deactivation curves of ΔR/R0 were fitted using a two-component exponential equation. (D; upper) Action potential waveform of ΔR/R0 and (D; lower) electrophysiology (n = 6 cells). The imaging frame rate was 1 kHz. Error bars indicate mean ± standard error.
Figure 2Imaging of a head-fixed mouse with LOTUS-V. (A) Venus fluorescence in the primary visual cortex (V1) of a paraformaldehyde-fixed brain. (B,C) Examples of two-photon fluorescence images of V1 area containing LOTUS-V-expressing neurons (B) and a single V1 neuron spatially well resolved by two-photon microscopy (C). (D) Schematic drawing of the prepared cranial window. The headplate and o-ring were glued over the cranial window. The furimazine solution was enclosed in the o-ring bath by a cover glass. (E; left) Schematic drawing of the imaging setup for a head-fixed mouse. A mouse was placed on a running disk while the head was fixed to a bar via the headplate. The velocity was recorded through a rotary encoder during imaging. LOTUS-V bioluminescence from the V1 was collected through a CCTV lens. NLuc and Venus emissions were separated by image splitting optics. These emissions were acquired using an image intensifier unit, which can amplify the signal up to 106 times, and recorded with an EMCCD camera in the dark condition. (E; right) Overlaid images of bright-field and bioluminescence in NLuc and Venus channels acquired by this system. (F) Averaged time series of velocity and LOWESS-smoothed ΔR/R0 at the locomotion onset (n = 12 sessions from N = 3 mice). The Granger causality test was performed to determine whether the velocity Granger-causes ΔR/R0 statistically (p < 0.05). (G,H) Plots of z-normalized ΔR/R0 in resting (<5 cm/s) and active (>5 cm/s) states of head-fixed mice, using (G) all time-points (p < 0.0001, Wilcoxon rank sum test; n = 707871; 31653 time-points), or (H) average values from each mouse (p < 0.05, Wilcoxon signed-rank test; N = 7 mice). Error bars indicate mean ± standard error; *p < 0.05; ****p < 0.0001.
Figure 3Imaging of V1 activity in a freely moving mouse using LOTUS-V and an automatic tracking system. (A) Schematic diagram of imaging of a freely moving mouse. The mouse was placed in its home cage and the LOTUS-V bioluminescence was recorded. (B; left) Overlaid image of bright field and LOTUS-V bioluminescence (green). (B; middle and right) Pseudo-colored trajectories of mouse locomotion, indicating velocity (middle) and z-normalized ΔR/R0 (right) (see also Supplementary Videos 1 and 2). (C) Bar plots of z-normalized ΔR/R0 in the resting (<1 cm/s) and active (>1 cm/s) states of freely moving mice (p < 0.0001 for Kruskal-Wallis test with all four categories; resting and active states of LOTUS-V, n = 41005 and 69826 time-points from N = 5 mice; resting and active states of LOTUS-V(D129R), n = 31648 and 34006 from N = 3; p-values shown in the panel were calculated using a Steel-Dwass test). (D) Averaged time series of velocity and LOWESS-smoothed ΔR/R0 at the locomotion onset (LOTUS-V, n = 29 sessions from N = 5 mice; D129R, n = 39 sessions from N = 3 mice). The Granger causality test was applied to determine whether the velocity Granger-causes ΔR/R0 (p < 0.01 and n.s. for LOTUS-V and LOTUS-V(D129R), respectively) (E) The z-normalized ΔR/R0 before (−19 s to 0 s) and after (1 s to 20 s) the locomotion onset. While the circles indicate z-normalized ΔR/R0 at each time point, the bar plots show the average in each category. P-value shown in the panel was calculated using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Time bin, 0.1 s (B,C), 1 s (D) and 4 s (E,F); Error bars indicate mean ± standard error; n.s., not significant; *p < 0.05; ****p < 0.0001.
Figure 4Imaging of interactively moving mice. (A; left) Overlaid image of bright-field and LOTUS-V bioluminescence from multiple mice (green). (A; middle and right) Pseudo-colored locomotion trajectory, indicating velocity (middle) and z-normalized ΔR/R0 from each mouse (right) (see also Supplementary Videos 3 and 4). (B) Bar plots of z-normalized ΔR/R0 during resting (<1 cm/s) and active (>1 cm/s) states of freely-moving multiple mice, demonstrating locomotion-dependent signal increases (Mouse 1, n = 5307 and 2066 time-points; Mouse 2, n = 9192 and 4721; Mouse 3, n = 8100 and 4385; All mice, n = 22599 and 11172). P-values were obtained using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. (C) Distance-dependent change in the activity of the primary visual cortex (V1) of interactively locomoting mice. Plots represent ΔR/R0 or z-normalized ΔR/R0 of each distance category (distance between the target mouse nose and other mice, see also (Supplementary Fig. 10; distance from Mouse 1, n = 688, 2338, 2118, and 2229 time-points for < 0, 0–2, 2–4 and > 4 cm, respectively; Mouse 2, n = 2239, 5382, 4226, and 2066; Mouse 3, n = 2516, 4019, 2313, and 3637). The distant values (>4 cm) were used as a baseline (R0) to calculate the ΔR/R0 (for Mouse 1–3) and for the z-normalization (for “all mice”). p < 0.0001 for Kruskal-Wallis test with all four categories. P-values shown in the panel were calculated using a Steel-Dwass test. (D) Comparison of distance-dependent change in V1 activity and the effect of locomotion (resting vs active states). Data from all mice were used (resting state (<1 cm/s, blue), n = 3538, 7606, 5843, and 5612 time-points for <0, 0–2, 2–4, and >4 cm, respectively; active state (>1 cm/s, magenta), n = 1905, 4133, 2814, and 2320). The ΔR/R0 in the “distant and resting” state was used as the baseline for z-normalization. P-values obtained using Kruskal-Wallis test with all four categories; p < 0.0001 in both states. P-values obtained using Steel-Dwass test are shown as blue (resting states) or magenta (active) symbols, while those obtained using the Wilcoxon rank sum test (to compare resting vs active) are shown in black. The time bin was 0.1 s. Error bars indicate mean ± standard error; n.s., not significant; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001.