Seminars

In this webinar on spatial navigation circuits, three researchers—Ann Hermundstad, Ila Fiete, and Barbara Webb—discussed how diverse species solve navigation problems using specialized yet evolutionarily conserved brain structures. Hermundstad illustrated the fruit fly’s central complex, focusing on how hardwired circuit motifs (e.g., sinusoidal steering curves) enable rapid, flexible learning of goal-directed navigation. This framework combines internal heading representations with modifiable goal signals, leveraging activity-dependent plasticity to adapt to new environments. Fiete explored the mammalian head-direction system, demonstrating how population recordings reveal a one-dimensional ring attractor underlying continuous integration of angular velocity. She showed that key theoretical predictions—low-dimensional manifold structure, isometry, uniform stability—are experimentally validated, underscoring parallels to insect circuits. Finally, Webb described honeybee navigation, featuring path integration, vector memories, route optimization, and the famous waggle dance. She proposed that allocentric velocity signals and vector manipulation within the central complex can encode and transmit distances and directions, enabling both sophisticated foraging and inter-bee communication via dance-based cues.

Running, swimming, or flying through the world, animals are constantly making decisions while on the move—decisions that allow them to choose where to eat, where to hide, and with whom to associate. Despite this most studies have considered only on the outcome of, and time taken to make, decisions. Motion is, however, crucial in terms of how space is represented by organisms during spatial decision-making. Employing a range of new technologies, including automated tracking, computational reconstruction of sensory information, and immersive ‘holographic’ virtual reality (VR) for animals, experiments with fruit flies, locusts and zebrafish (representing aerial, terrestrial and aquatic locomotion, respectively), I will demonstrate that this time-varying representation results in the emergence of new and fundamental geometric principles that considerably impact decision-making. Specifically, we find that the brain spontaneously reduces multi-choice decisions into a series of abrupt (‘critical’) binary decisions in space-time, a process that repeats until only one option—the one ultimately selected by the individual—remains. Due to the critical nature of these transitions (and the corresponding increase in ‘susceptibility’) even noisy brains are extremely sensitive to very small differences between remaining options (e.g., a very small difference in neuronal activity being in “favor” of one option) near these locations in space-time. This mechanism facilitates highly effective decision-making, and is shown to be robust both to the number of options available, and to context, such as whether options are static (e.g. refuges) or mobile (e.g. other animals). In addition, we find evidence that the same geometric principles of decision-making occur across scales of biological organisation, from neural dynamics to animal collectives, suggesting they are fundamental features of spatiotemporal computation.

Many flexible behaviors are thought to rely on internal representations of an animal’s spatial relationship to its environment and of the consequences of its actions in that environment. While such representations—e.g. of head direction and value—have been extensively studied, how they are combined to guide behavior is not well understood. I will discuss how we are exploring these questions using a classical visual learning paradigm for the fly. I’ll begin by describing a simple policy that, when tethered to an internal representation of heading, captures structured behavioral variability in this task. I’ll describe how ambiguities in the fly’s visual surroundings affect its perception and, when coupled to this policy, manifest in predictable changes in behavior. Informed by newly-released connectomic data, I’ll then discuss how these computations might be carried out and combined within specific circuits in the fly’s central brain, and how perception and action might interact to shape individual differences in learning performance.