| Literature DB >> 31156420 |
Jean-Sébastien Jouhanneau1,2, James F A Poulet1,2.
Abstract
Although we know a great deal about monosynaptic connectivity, transmission and integration in the mammalian nervous system from in vitro studies, very little is known in vivo. This is partly because it is technically difficult to evoke action potentials and simultaneously record small amplitude subthreshold responses in closely (<150 μm) located pairs of neurons. To address this, we have developed in vivo two-photon targeted multiple (2-4) whole-cell patch clamp recordings of nearby neurons in superficial cortical layers 1-3. Here, we describe a step-by-step guide to this approach in the anesthetized mouse primary somatosensory cortex, including: the design of the setup, surgery, preparation of pipettes, targeting and acquisition of multiple whole-cell recordings, as well as in vivo and post hoc histology. The procedure takes ~4 h from start of surgery to end of recording and allows examinations both into the electrophysiological features of unitary excitatory and inhibitory monosynaptic inputs during different brain states as well as the synaptic mechanisms of correlated neuronal activity.Entities:
Keywords: cortex; in vivo; synapse; two-photon microscopy; whole-cell
Year: 2019 PMID: 31156420 PMCID: PMC6532332 DOI: 10.3389/fnsyn.2019.00015
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Synaptic Neurosci ISSN: 1663-3563
Troubleshooting during multiple whole cell patching.
| Step | Problem | Possible reason | Solution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Surgery | Edema | Brain surface damaged | Take care when removing the dura as damaging the pia will result in tissue swelling. |
| Craniotomy too large | Keep size ~700 μm2 | ||
| Anesthesia | Isoflurane increases plasma volume which can induce swelling (Hamada et al., | ||
| 2 | Pipettes unable to enter the brain | Dura intact | Attempt to remove the dura. |
| Blood vessel in the way | Make sure your brain entry point is clear. The use of green light will help to increase the contrast between blood vessels and brain tissue. | ||
| 3 | Dye not flowing out the pipette | Pipette clogged | Make sure the positive pressure is on before entering the ringer solution this will help maintaining a clean pipette tip. Use a fresh pipette. |
| Debris accumulating outside the pipette tip | Precipitate accumulating outside of the pipette could result from a grounding issue. Make sure the Ringer’s solution in the recording chamber is not touching the head post. | ||
| Pipette clogged, visible debris inside the pipette | Debris inside the pipette can come from the intracellular solution itself. Use a fresh 0.45 μm syringe filter (Minisart SRP4, Sartorius) for each experiment. Debris can also come from the silver chloride electrode. Make sure the end of the pipettes are flame polished to avoid removing pieces of silver chloride coating. Try clearing the tip of the pipette by increasing briefly the pressure (+50 mbar). If unsuccessful use new pipettes. Do not use clogged pipettes even if the tip resistance is acceptable as it will most likely impair sealing. | ||
| Faulty pressure system | Check air pressure system can maintain a stable pressure. | ||
| No image | Laser off | Turn laser on. | |
| Shutter closed | Open shutter. | ||
| PMT overload | Check external lights are switched off while the PMTs are on. Reset the PMT. | ||
| Poor imaging quality | High background fluorescence | Decrease the internal pipette pressure to reduce efflux of intracellular solution. | |
| Leak of Ringer’s solution out of the recording chamber | Check the contact between Ringer’s solution and the objective. Try fixing the leak with Vaseline. | ||
| Laser power is too high | Small spherical dark spots appearing in the image is a sign of tissue damage caused by high laser power. The quality of the preparation is compromised and experiment should be terminated. | ||
| 4 | Unable to seal | Pipette resistance not optimal | Although lower resistance pipette (<5 MΩ) will give you a better access to the cell it can also decrease sealing success. Aim for pipette resistance of 5–8 MΩ. |
| Dirt on pipette tip | Although the resistance of the dirty pipette tip might be in the expected range, visible dirt dramatically reduce chances to seal successfully on neurons. Use a fresh pipette. | ||
| High pressure in Steps 3/4 | Decrease the pressure to <30 mBar while approaching the cell. Higher pressure will tend to “push” away the targeted neuron. In addition, in some cases, a slight negative pressure while sealing on the cell might be beneficial. | ||
| Intracellular solution | Check the osmolarity of your internal solution which usually need to be lower than the one of the Ringer’s solution. | ||
| Holding potential not set to −70 mV | Make sure the holding potential is set up to −70 mV while sealing on the cell. In some cases, it will help to bring gradually the cell to −100 mV during the sealing procedure and then back to −70 mV before breaking in. | ||
| 5 | Unable to break in | Pipette resistance is too high | Pipette with a resistance higher than 8 MΩ will tend to be more difficult to break in. The optimum pipette tip resistance is between 5–8 MΩ. |
| Patched a blood vessel | Blood vessels can look like cell bodies but a fast vertical scan will usually help identify cells from capillaries. Use a fresh pipette. | ||
| Patched on buddle of fibres | In some cases, the pipette might catch on fibres on the way to the cells of interest and even though a giga-seal will be made breaking in will fail. Use a fresh pipette. | ||
| Faulty pressure system | Make sure the pressure system is reactive to your suction. Suction must be brief. If something is damping the change of pressure breaking in will be impaired. | ||
| Recording | Short duration recordings (<5 mins) | Brain movement | Breathing of the mouse might create movement. Check the position of the mouse head relative to the body. If movement persist use 1.2% agarose ringer solution to stabilize the brain movements, or stop the experiment. Multiple pipettes entering the brain can cause a pressure build up in the surrounding tissue and the tissue will eventually relax to its original position. This may create tension on the seal and sometimes cause the pipette to push through or away from the cell. Visual checking during the recording using two-photon scanning and small adjustments of the pipette position can help stabilize recordings. Isoflurane induces stronger pulsations of the brain than urethane. |
| Craniotomy is too large | New experiment with smaller craniotomy. If attempting awake recordings reduce craniotomy size even further. | ||
| Unstable head implant | The head implant may have become loosened due to tissue regrowth or poor gluing. Attempt adding extra glue or new experiment required. | ||
| Location of the pipette relative to the cell of interest | Aim for the most dorsal third of the targeted neuron soma to increase success rate and stability. | ||
| Unable to trigger action potentials | Patched on glial cell | Check firing pattern, glial cells do not spike and typically have a very hyperpolarized Vm with little or no spontaneous input. Change pipette and start over. | |
| Access resistance is too high | Transiently applying negative pressure to the pipette tip. Slightly increase positive pressure during the final targeting approach. Improve brain stabilization procedure to reduce movement which can increase the access resistance during the recording. Retract and use a lower resistance pipette. | ||
| Vm depolarized | Recording solution | Use fresh Ringer’s and intracellular solutions and check osmolarity. | |
| Vm drift | Reference electrodes | Change or re-chloridize the recording and reference electrodes. | |
| Metal head implant touching Ringer’s solution | Isolate head implant from Ringer’s solution in recording chamber. | ||
| No spontaneous activity | Anesthesia level too high | Reduce isoflurane levels. | |
| Body temperature is too low | Adjust the temperature controller. |
Figure 1In vivo two-photon targeted multiple whole-cell patch-clamp setup. (A) Photograph of the setup showing: (1) two-photon microscope, micromanipulators and pre-amplifier fixed on an air-damped table; (2) Chameleon Ultra II laser; (3) Luigs and Neumann micromanipulator control units; (4) Sigmann Electronik air pressure controller; (5) Sigmann Electronik dual piezo amplifier; (6) light source to illuminate the preparation; (7) FHC temperature controller for anesthetized experiments; (8) Tektronix Oscilloscope; (9) Luigs and Neumman micromanipulator and shifting table control pads; (10) ITC-18 Heka analog to digital converter board; (11) Multiclamp 700B amplifier; and (12) data acquisition computer. (B) Schematic top-down view of recording area showing arrangement of electrode holders, light, reference electrode and somatosensory/optogenetic stimulator. Note that all the recording electrodes are on the same side for ease of targeting and to allow space on the contralateral side for stimulation devices. (C) Cartoon showing mouse position and head support. (D) Schematic showing the angle of pipettes defined by the X-axis used to allow access under the objective. (E) Photograph of the glass recording pipette showing optimal taper for in vivo two-photon targeted patch-clamp recording. (F) Photograph showing a zoom of the pipette tip from (E).
Figure 2Two-photon targeted whole-cell patch-clamp procedure. (A) Step 1. Top: schematic showing position, movement direction (arrow) and movement order (1–4) of dye-filled (Alexa 594) recording pipettes from ~300 μm above the craniotomy to the brain surface, high positive pressure is maintained to avoid pipette tip clogging. Bottom: photograph taken using a CCD camera illuminated with green light showing example craniotomy used for anesthetized patching (~500 μm diameter) in which the dura has been removed. (B) Step 2. As in (A), but showing, top: the insertion of the pipettes through the pia under visual control (820 nm) using high positive pressure to ~−100 μm from pial surface. As soon as the pipettes enter the brain the pressure is reduced to 100 mbar and then 30 mbar when closer to the cell body positions. Bottom: in vivo two-photon image showing the position of four pipettes in the same focal plane near the cell bodies of interest. Positioning is performed sequentially, one pipette at a time. Cell bodies are revealed as dark shadows contrasting with the fluorescent signal of the extracellular dye. (C) Step 3. Top: the targeting phase where the excitation light wavelength is altered to visualize the cells of interest; in this case, excitatory glutamatergic neurons expressing the red fluorophore tdT (white arrows). Bottom: in vivo fluorescent image of pyramidal neurons (PYR) expressing tdT corresponding to the photo in (B). (D) Step 4. Top: the final sealing phase of the procedure. A recording pipette is pushed into the cell soma membrane and then, upon strong contact, the pressure is released to achieve a giga-seal. The cells are sealed sequentially under visual control. Bottom: in vivo image following sealing of all four pipettes. Note the reduction in background fluorescence during sealing because of the reduction in extracellular dye. (E) Step 5. Top: entering whole-cell configuration following seal-breaking by applying a transient negative pressure. As soon as the membrane patch is ruptured the dye within the pipettes will fill the neurons. Bottom: in vivo image of neurons filled with Alexa 594 (pseudo-colored) after the recording experiments. (F) Simultaneous example in vivo whole-cell Vm recordings of the four excitatory pyramidal neurons shown in (E) showing spontaneous activity with Up- and Down-states under urethane anesthesia. (G) Post hoc reconstruction of three biocytin-filled excitatory pyramidal neurons from a multiple whole-cell recording. (H) Proportion of triple, double, single and no recordings from trials using three pipettes in (left) wild type mice using the shadow patching method and (right) in mice expressing a cell type-specific fluorophore (PV-cre x Ai9 and SST-cre x Ai9). Data from fluorescent mice included at least one fluorescent neuron in the single/double/triple recordings. (I) Plots showing the negative correlation between the success rate of achieving a whole-cell patch clamp recording in wild type and fluorescent mice (same data as in (H)) and the time taken from phases (A) to (E) described above. Each dot represents the mean success rate for a 1 min time bin from 15 wild type mice (37 trials) and 18 mice expressing fluorescent proteins (SST-cre × Ai9 and PV-crex Ai9; 42 trials).
Figure 3Excitatory and inhibitory monosynaptic connections in vivo. (A) In vivo two-photon fluorescent imaging of three excitatory pyramidal neurons filled with Alexa 594 pseudo-colored. (B) Connectivity diagram of experiment shown in (A) where PYR1 is connected to PYR3. (C) Vm fluctuation of the pyramidal neurons recoded in (A) showing the stimulation protocol consisting of brief current injection to evoke single action potentials in each neuron every 2 s. (D) Example monosynaptic excitatory connection from PYR1 to PYR3 shown in (A–C). (E) In vivo image of a triple recording including a PV-tdT expressing GABA-ergic inhibitory interneuron. (F) Connectivity diagram of experiment from the triple recording shown in (E) where an excitatory pyramidal neuron PYR2 is connected to PV-tdT expressing GABA-ergic inhibitory PV, while PV sends an inhibitory monosynaptic connection to the excitatory pyramidal neuron PYR1. (G) Excitatory monosynaptic connection from PYR2 to PV shown in (E,F). (H) Inhibitory monosynaptic connection from PV to PYR1 shown in (D).