The Grossman Center for Quantitative Biology and Human Behavior at the University of Chicago seeks outstanding applicants for multiple postdoctoral positions in computational and theoretical neuroscience. We especially welcome applicants who develop mathematical approaches, computational models, and machine learning methods to study the brain at the circuits, systems, or cognitive levels. The current faculty members of the Grossman Center to work with are: Brent Doiron’s lab investigates how the cellular and synaptic circuitry of neuronal circuits supports the complex dynamics and computations that are routinely observed in the brain. Jorge Jaramillo’s lab investigates how subcortical structures interact with cortical circuits to subserve cognitive processes such as memory, attention, and decision making. Ramon Nogueira’s lab investigates the geometry of representations as the computational support of cognitive processes like abstraction in noisy artificial and biological neural networks. Marcella Noorman’s lab investigates how properties of synapses, neurons, and circuits shape the neural dynamics that enable flexible and efficient computation. Samuel Muscinelli’s lab studies how the anatomy of brain circuits both governs learning and adapts to it. We combine analytical theory, machine learning, and data analysis, in close collaboration with experimentalists. Appointees will have access to state-of-the-art facilities and multiple opportunities for collaboration with exceptional experimental labs within the Neuroscience Institute, as well as other labs from the departments of Physics, Computer Sciences, and Statistics. The Grossman Center offers competitive postdoctoral salaries in the vibrant and international city of Chicago, and a rich intellectual environment that includes the Argonne National Laboratory and UChicago’s Data Science Institute. The Neuroscience Institute is currently engaged in a major expansion that includes the incorporation of several new faculty members in the next few years.

Biological agents continually reconcile the internal states of their brain circuits with incoming sensory and environmental evidence to evaluate when and how to act. The brains of biological agents, including animals and humans, exploit many evolutionary innovations, chiefly modularity—observable at the level of anatomically-defined brain regions, cortical layers, and cell types among others—that can be repurposed in a compositional manner to endow the animal with a highly flexible behavioral repertoire. Accordingly, their behaviors show their own modularity, yet such behavioral modules seldom correspond directly to traditional notions of modularity in brains. It remains unclear how to link neural and behavioral modularity in a compositional manner. We propose a comprehensive framework—compositional modes—to identify overarching compositionality spanning specialized submodules, such as brain regions. Our framework directly links the behavioral repertoire with distributed patterns of population activity, brain-wide, at multiple concurrent spatial and temporal scales. Using whole-brain recordings of zebrafish brains, we introduce an unsupervised pipeline based on neural network models, constrained by biological data, to reveal highly conserved compositional modes across individuals despite the naturalistic (spontaneous or task-independent) nature of their behaviors. These modes provided a scaffolding for other modes that account for the idiosyncratic behavior of each fish. We then demonstrate experimentally that compositional modes can be manipulated in a consistent manner by behavioral and pharmacological perturbations. Our results demonstrate that even natural behavior in different individuals can be decomposed and understood using a relatively small number of neurobehavioral modules—the compositional modes—and elucidate a compositional neural basis of behavior. This approach aligns with recent progress in understanding how reasoning capabilities and internal representational structures develop over the course of learning or training, offering insights into the modularity and flexibility in artificial and biological agents.

The basis of the mind, of mental states, and complex behaviors is the flow of energy through microscopic and macroscopic brain structures. Energy flow through brain circuits is powered by thousands of mitochondria populating the inside of every neuron, glial, and other nucleated cell across the brain-body unit. This seminar will cover emerging approaches to study the mind-mitochondria connection and present early attempts to map the distribution and diversity of mitochondria across brain tissue. In rodents, I will present convergent multimodal evidence anchored in enzyme activities, gene expression, and animal behavior that distinct behaviorally-relevant mitochondrial phenotypes exist across large-scale mouse brain networks. Extending these findings to the human brain, I will present a developing systematic biochemical and molecular map of mitochondrial variation across cortical and subcortical brain structures, representing a foundation to understand the origin of complex energy patterns that give rise to the human mind.

A central question in neuroscience is how the structure of brain circuits determines their activity and function. To explore this systematically, we developed a 230,000-neuron model of mouse primary visual cortex (area V1). The model integrates a broad array of experimental data:Distribution and morpho-electric properties of different neuron types in V1.

Many insect species maintain a nest around which their foraging behaviour is centered, and can use path integration to maintain an accurate estimate of their distance and direction (a vector) to their nest. Some species, such as bees and ants, can also store the vector information for multiple salient locations in the world, such as food sources, in a common coordinate system. They can also use remembered views of the terrain around salient locations or along travelled routes to guide return. Recent modelling of these abilities shows convergence on a small set of algorithms and assumptions that appear sufficient to account for a wide range of behavioural data, and which can be mapped to specific insect brain circuits. Notably, this does not include any significant topological knowledge: the insect does not need to recover the information (implicit in their vector memory) about the relationships between salient places; nor to maintain any connectedness or ordering information between view memories; nor to form any associations between views and vectors. However, there remains some experimental evidence not fully explained by these algorithms that may point towards the existence of a more complex or integrated mental map in insects.

Research in Neuroscience, as in many scientific disciplines, is undergoing a renaissance based on deep learning. Unique to Neuroscience, deep learning models can be used not only as a tool but interpreted as models of the brain. The central claims of recent deep learning-based models of brain circuits are that they shed light on fundamental functions being optimized or make novel predictions about neural phenomena. We show, through the case-study of grid cells in the entorhinal-hippocampal circuit, that one may get neither. We rigorously examine the claims of deep learning models of grid cells using large-scale hyperparameter sweeps and theory-driven experimentation, and demonstrate that the results of such models are more strongly driven by particular, non-fundamental, and post-hoc implementation choices than fundamental truths about neural circuits or the loss function(s) they might optimize. We discuss why these models cannot be expected to produce accurate models of the brain without the addition of substantial amounts of inductive bias, an informal No Free Lunch result for Neuroscience.

To generate brain circuits that are both flexible and stable requires the coordination of powerful developmental mechanisms acting at different scales, including activity-dependent synaptic plasticity and changes in single neuron properties. The brain prepares to efficiently compute information and reliably generate behavior during early development without any prior sensory experience but through patterned spontaneous activity. After the onset of sensory experience, ongoing activity continues to modify sensory circuits, and plays an important functional role in the mature brain. Using quantitative data analysis, experiment-driven theory and computational modeling, I will present a framework for how neural circuits are built and organized during early postnatal development into functional units, and how they are modified by intact and perturbed sensory-evoked activity. Inspired by experimental data from sensory cortex, I will then show how neural circuits use the resulting non-random connectivity to flexibly gate a network’s response, providing a mechanism for routing information.

Fly Escape Behaviors: Flexible and Modular We have identified a set of escape maneuvers performed by a fly when confronted by a looming object. These escape responses can be divided into distinct behavioral modules. Some of the modules are very stereotyped, as when the fly rapidly extends its middle legs to jump off the ground. Other modules are more complex and require the fly to combine information about both the location of the threat and its own body posture. In response to an approaching object, a fly chooses some varying subset of these behaviors to perform. We would like to understand the neural process by which a fly chooses when to perform a given escape behavior. Beyond an appealing set of behaviors, this system has two other distinct advantages for probing neural circuitry. First, the fly will perform escape behaviors even when tethered such that its head is fixed and neural activity can be imaged or monitored using electrophysiology. Second, using Drosophila as an experimental animal makes available a rich suite of genetic tools to activate, silence, or image small numbers of cells potentially involved in the behaviors. Neural Circuits for Escape Until recently, visually induced escape responses have been considered a hardwired reflex in Drosophila. White-eyed flies with deficient visual pigment will perform a stereotyped middle-leg jump in response to a light-off stimulus, and this reflexive response is known to be coordinated by the well-studied giant fiber (GF) pathway. The GFs are a pair of electrically connected, large-diameter interneurons that traverse the cervical connective. A single GF spike results in a stereotyped pattern of muscle potentials on both sides of the body that extends the fly's middle pair of legs and starts the flight motor. Recently, we have found that a fly escaping a looming object displays many more behaviors than just leg extension. Most of these behaviors could not possibly be coordinated by the known anatomy of the GF pathway. Response to a looming threat thus appears to involve activation of numerous different neural pathways, which the fly may decide if and when to employ. Our goal is to identify the descending pathways involved in coordinating these escape behaviors as well as the central brain circuits, if any, that govern their activation. Automated Single-Fly Screening We have developed a new kind of high-throughput genetic screen to automatically capture fly escape sequences and quantify individual behaviors. We use this system to perform a high-throughput genetic silencing screen to identify cell types of interest. Automation permits analysis at the level of individual fly movements, while retaining the capacity to screen through thousands of GAL4 promoter lines. Single-fly behavioral analysis is essential to detect more subtle changes in behavior during the silencing screen, and thus to identify more specific components of the contributing circuits than previously possible when screening populations of flies. Our goal is to identify candidate neurons involved in coordination and choice of escape behaviors. Measuring Neural Activity During Behavior We use whole-cell patch-clamp electrophysiology to determine the functional roles of any identified candidate neurons. Flies perform escape behaviors even when their head and thorax are immobilized for physiological recording. This allows us to link a neuron's responses directly to an action.

G. Quattrocolo: Cajal-Retzius cells in the postnatal hippocampus; F. Garcia-Moreno: Mosaic evolutionary history of brain circuits through the lens of neurogenesis

The science of the retina has reached an interesting stage of completion. There exists now a consensus standard model of this neural system - at least in the minds of many researchers - that serves as a baseline against which to evaluate new claims. The standard model links phenomena from molecular biophysics, cell biology, neuroanatomy, synaptic physiology, circuit function, and visual psychophysics. It is further supported by a normative theory explaining what the purpose is of processing visual information this way. Most new reports of retinal phenomena fit squarely within the standard model, and major revisions seem increasingly unlikely. Given that our understanding of other brain circuits with comparable complexity is much more rudimentary, it is worth considering an example of what success looks like. In this talk I will summarize what I think are the ingredients that led to this mature understanding of the retina. Equally important, a number of practices and concepts that are currently en vogue in neuroscience were not needed or indeed counterproductive. I look forward to debating how these lessons might extend to other areas of brain research.

Animals traversing different environments encounter both stable background stimuli and novel cues, which are generally thought to be detected by primary sensory neurons and then distinguished by downstream brain circuits. Sensory adaptation is a neural mechanism that filters background by minimizing responses to stable sensory stimuli, and a fundamental feature of sensory systems. Adaptation over relatively fast timescales (milliseconds to minutes) have been reported in many sensory systems. However, adaptation to persistent environmental stimuli over longer timescales (hours to days) have been largely unexplored, even though those timescales are ethologically important since animals typically stay in one environment for hours. I showed that each of the ~1,000 olfactory sensory neuron (OSN) subtypes in the mouse harbors a distinct transcriptome whose content is precisely determined by interactions between its odorant receptor and the environment. This transcriptional variation is systematically organized to support sensory adaptation: expression levels of many genes relevant to transforming odors into spikes continuously vary across OSN subtypes, dynamically adjust to new environments over hours, and accurately predict acute OSN-specific odor responses. The sensory periphery therefore separates salient signals from predictable background via a transcriptional mechanism whose moment-to-moment state reflects the past and constrains the future; these findings suggest a general model in which structured transcriptional variation within a cell type reflects individual experience.

The origins, mechanisms and consequences of epilepsy in the developing brain are incompletely understood. Many developmental epilepsies have a genetic basis and their mechanisms stem from deficits in the function of one or numerous genes. Others, such as those that follow prolonged febrile seizures or severe birth asphyxia in a ‘normal’ brain may depend on the interaction of the insult with the rapidly evolving brain cells and circuits. Yet, how early-life insults may provoke epilepsy is unclear, and requires multiple levels of analysis: behavior, circuits, cells [neurons, glia] and molecules. Here we discuss developmental epileptogenesis, addressing some of its special features: the epilepsy phenotype, the effects insults on the maturation of brain circuits, the role of neuron-glia-neuron communication in cellular and circuit refinement, and how transient epileptogenic insults provoke enduring changes in the structure, connectivity and function of salient neuronal populations. We will highlight resolved questions- and the many unresolved issues that require tackling in 2022 and beyond.

To build an appropriate representation of the sensory stimuli around the world, neural circuits are wired according to both intrinsic factors and external sensory stimuli. Moreover, the brain circuits have the capacity to rewire in response to altered environment, both during early development and throughout life. In this talk, I will give an overview about my past research in studying the dynamic processes underlying functional maturation and plasticity in rodent sensory cortices. I will also present data about the current and future research in my lab – that is, the synaptic and circuit mechanisms by which the mature brain circuits employ to regulate the balance between stability and plasticity. By applying chronic 2-photon calcium and close-loop visual exposure, we studied the circuit changes at single-neuron resolution to show that concurrent running with visual stimulus is required to drive neuroplasticity in the adult brain.

Animals exhibit extraordinary variation in their behavior, yet little is known about the neural mechanisms that generate this diversity. My lab has been taking advantage of the rapid diversification of male courtship behaviors in Drosophila to glean insight into how evolution shapes the nervous system to generate species-specific behaviors. By translating neurogenetic tools from D. melanogaster to closely related Drosophila species, we have begun to directly compare the homologous neural circuits and pinpoint sites of adaptive change. Across species, P1 neurons serve as a conserved node in regulating male courtship: these neurons are selectively activated by the sensory cues indicative of an appropriate mate and their activation triggers enduring courtship displays. We have been examining how different sensory pathways converge onto P1 neurons to regulate a male’s state of arousal, honing his pursuit of a prospective partner. Moreover, by performing cross-species comparison of these circuits, we have begun to gain insight into how reweighting of sensory inputs to P1 neurons underlies species-specific mate recognition. Our results suggest how variation at flexible nodes within the nervous system can serve as a substrate for behavioral evolution, shedding light on the types of changes that are possible and preferable within brain circuits.

Motivational drives are internal states that can be different even in similar interactions with external stimuli. Curiosity as the motivational drive for novelty-seeking and investigating the surrounding environment is for survival as essential and intrinsic as hunger. Curiosity, hunger, and appetitive aggression drive three different goal-directed behaviors—novelty seeking, food eating, and hunting— but these behaviors are composed of similar actions in animals. This similarity of actions has made it challenging to study novelty seeking and distinguish it from eating and hunting in nonarticulating animals. The brain mechanisms underlying this basic survival drive, curiosity, and novelty-seeking behavior have remained unclear. In spite of having well-developed techniques to study mouse brain circuits, there are many controversial and different results in the field of motivational behavior. This has left the functions of motivational brain regions such as the zona incerta (ZI) still uncertain. Not having a transparent, nonreinforced, and easily replicable paradigm is one of the main causes of this uncertainty. Therefore, we chose a simple solution to conduct our research: giving the mouse freedom to choose what it wants—double freeaccess choice. By examining mice in an experimental battery of object free-access double-choice (FADC) and social interaction tests—using optogenetics, chemogenetics, calcium fiber photometry, multichannel recording electrophysiology, and multicolor mRNA in situ hybridization—we uncovered a cell type–specific cortico-subcortical brain circuit of the curiosity and novelty-seeking behavior. We found in mice that inhibitory neurons in the medial ZI (ZIm) are essential for the decision to investigate an object or a conspecific. These neurons receive excitatory input from the prelimbic cortex to signal the initiation of exploration. This signal is modulated in the ZIm by the level of investigatory motivation. Increased activity in the ZIm instigates deep investigative action by inhibiting the periaqueductal gray region. A subpopulation of inhibitory ZIm neurons expressing tachykinin 1 (TAC1) modulates the investigatory behavior.

Organisms face challenges to survival throughout life. When we freeze or flee in danger, we often feel fear. Tracing the deep history of danger gives a different perspective. The first cells living billions of years ago had to detect and respond to danger in order to survive. Life is about not being dead, and behavior is a major way that organisms hold death off. Although behavior does not require a nervous system, complex organisms have brain circuits for detecting and responding to danger, the deep roots of which go back to the first cells. But these circuits do not make fear, and fear is not the cause of why we freeze or flee. Fear a human invention; a construct we use to account for what happens in our minds when we become aware that we are in harm’s way. This requires a brain that can personally know that it existed in the past, that it is the entity that might be harmed in the present, and that it will cease to exist it the future. If other animals have conscious experiences, they cannot have the kinds of conscious experiences we have because they do not have the kinds of brains we have. This is not meant as a denial of animal consciousness; it is simply a statement about the fact that every species has a different brain. Nor is it a declaration about the wonders of the human brain, since we have done some wonderful, but also horrific, things with our brains. In fact, we are on the way to a climatic disaster that will not, as some suggest, destroy the Earth. But it will make it inhabitable for our kind, and other organisms with high energy demands. Bacteria have made it for billions of years and will likely be fine. The rest is up for grabs, and, in a very real sense, up to us.

The last decade in the field of neuroscience has been marked by intense debate on the meaning of the term fear. Whereas some have argued that fear (as well as other emotions) relies on cognitive capacities that are unique to humans, others view it as a negative state constructed from essential building blocks. This latter definition posits that fear states are associated with varying readouts that one could consider to be parallel processes or serial events tied to a specific hierarchy. Within this framework, innate defensive behaviors are considered to be common displays of fear states that lie under the control of hard-wired brain circuits. As a general rule, these defensive behaviors can be classified as either reactive or cognitive based on a thread imminence continuum. However, while evidence of the neuronal circuits that lead to these divergent behavioral strategies has accrued over the last decades, most literature has considered these responses in isolation. As a result, important misconceptions have arisen regarding how fear circuits are distributed in the brain and the contribution of specific nodes within these circuits to defensive behaviors. To mitigate the status quo, I will conduct a systematic comparison of brain circuits driving the expression of freezing and active avoidance behavior, which I will use as well-studied proxies of reactive and cognitive fear, respectively. In addition, I propose that by integrating associative information with interoceptive and exteroceptive signals the central nucleus of the amygdala plays a crucial role in biasing the selection of defensive behaviors.

I am interested in developing a neurally mechanistic understanding of how primate brains represent the world through its visual system and how such representations enable a remarkable set of intelligent behaviors. In this talk, I will primarily highlight aspects of my current research that focuses on dissecting the brain circuits that support core object recognition behavior (primates’ ability to categorize objects within hundreds of milliseconds) in non-human primates. On the one hand, my work empirically examines how well computational models of the primate ventral visual pathways embed knowledge of the visual brain function (e.g., Bashivan*, Kar*, DiCarlo, Science, 2019). On the other hand, my work has led to various functional and architectural insights that help improve such brain models. For instance, we have exposed the necessity of recurrent computations in primate core object recognition (Kar et al., Nature Neuroscience, 2019), one that is strikingly missing from most feedforward artificial neural network models. Specifically, we have observed that the primate ventral stream requires fast recurrent processing via ventrolateral PFC for robust core object recognition (Kar and DiCarlo, Neuron, 2021). In addition, I have been currently developing various chemogenetic strategies to causally target specific bidirectional neural circuits in the macaque brain during multiple object recognition tasks to further probe their relevance during this behavior. I plan to transform these data and insights into tangible progress in neuroscience via my collaboration with various computational groups and building improved brain models of object recognition. I hope to end the talk with a brief glimpse of some of my planned future work!

Dr. Rajan and her lab design neural network models based on experimental data, and reverse-engineer them to figure out how brain circuits function in health and disease. They recently developed a powerful framework for tracing neural paths across multiple brain regions— called Current-Based Decomposition (CURBD). This new approach enables the computation of excitatory and inhibitory input currents that drive a given neuron, aiding in the discovery of how entire populations of neurons behave across multiple interacting brain regions. Dr. Rajan’s team has applied this method to studying the neural underpinnings of behavior. As an example, when CURBD was applied to data gathered from an animal model often used to study depression- and anxiety-like behaviors (i.e., learned helplessness) the underlying biology driving adaptive and maladaptive behaviors in the face of stress was revealed. With this framework Dr. Rajan's team probes for mechanisms at work across brain regions that support both healthy and disease states-- as well as identify key divergences from multiple different nervous systems, including zebrafish, mice, non-human primates, and humans.

Rajanlab designs neural network models constrained by experimental data, and reverse engineers them to figure out how brain circuits function in health and disease. Recently, we have been developing a powerful new theory-based framework for “in-vivo tract tracing” from multi-regional neural activity collected experimentally. We call this framework CURrent-Based Decomposition (CURBD). CURBD employs recurrent neural networks (RNNs) directly constrained, from the outset, by time series measurements acquired experimentally, such as Ca2+ imaging or electrophysiological data. Once trained, these data-constrained RNNs let us infer matrices quantifying the interactions between all pairs of modeled units. Such model-derived “directed interaction matrices” can then be used to separately compute excitatory and inhibitory input currents that drive a given neuron from all other neurons. Therefore different current sources can be de-mixed – either within the same region or from other regions, potentially brain-wide – which collectively give rise to the population dynamics observed experimentally. Source de-mixed currents obtained through CURBD allow an unprecedented view into multi-region mechanisms inaccessible from measurements alone. We have applied this method successfully to several types of neural data from our experimental collaborators, e.g., zebrafish (Deisseroth lab, Stanford), mice (Harvey lab, Harvard), monkeys (Rudebeck lab, Sinai), and humans (Rutishauser lab, Cedars Sinai), where we have discovered both directed interactions brain wide and inter-area currents during different types of behaviors. With this powerful framework based on data-constrained multi-region RNNs and CURrent Based Decomposition (CURBD), we ask if there are conserved multi-region mechanisms across different species, as well as identify key divergences.

General anesthesia is a drug-induced, reversible condition comprised of five behavioral states: unconsciousness, amnesia (loss of memory), antinociception (loss of pain sensation), akinesia (immobility), and hemodynamic stability with control of the stress response. Our work shows that a primary mechanism through which anesthetics create these altered states of arousal is by initiating and maintaining highly structured oscillations. These oscillations impair communication among brain regions. We illustrate this effect by presenting findings from our human studies of general anesthesia using high-density EEG recordings and intracranial recordings. These studies have allowed us to give a detailed characterization of the neurophysiology of loss and recovery of consciousness due to propofol. We show how these dynamics change systematically with different anesthetic classes and with age. As a consequence, we have developed a principled, neuroscience-based paradigm for using the EEG to monitor the brain states of patients receiving general anesthesia. We demonstrate that the state of general anesthesia can be rapidly reversed by activating specific brain circuits. Finally, we demonstrate that the state of general anesthesia can be controlled using closed loop feedback control systems. The success of our research has depended critically on tight coupling of experiments, signal processing research and mathematical modeling.

Rajanlab designs neural network models constrained by experimental data, and reverse engineers them to figure out how brain circuits function in health and disease. Recently, we have been developing a powerful new theory-based framework for “in-vivo tract tracing” from multi-regional neural activity collected experimentally. We call this framework CURrent-Based Decomposition (CURBD). CURBD employs recurrent neural networks (RNNs) directly constrained, from the outset, by time series measurements acquired experimentally, such as Ca2+ imaging or electrophysiological data. Once trained, these data-constrained RNNs let us infer matrices quantifying the interactions between all pairs of modeled units. Such model-derived “directed interaction matrices” can then be used to separately compute excitatory and inhibitory input currents that drive a given neuron from all other neurons. Therefore different current sources can be de-mixed – either within the same region or from other regions, potentially brain-wide – which collectively give rise to the population dynamics observed experimentally. Source de-mixed currents obtained through CURBD allow an unprecedented view into multi-region mechanisms inaccessible from measurements alone. We have applied this method successfully to several types of neural data from our experimental collaborators, e.g., zebrafish (Deisseroth lab, Stanford), mice (Harvey lab, Harvard), monkeys (Rudebeck lab, Sinai), and humans (Rutishauser lab, Cedars Sinai), where we have discovered both directed interactions brain wide and inter-area currents during different types of behaviors. With this framework based on data-constrained multi-region RNNs and CURrent Based Decomposition (CURBD), we can ask if there are conserved multi-region mechanisms across different species, as well as identify key divergences.

Genetic targeting of neuronal cells with activity reporters (calcium or voltage indicators) has initiated the paradigmatic transition whereby photons have replaced electrons for reading large-scale brain activities at cellular resolution. This has alleviated the limitations of single cell or extracellular electrophysiological probing, which only give access to the activity of at best a few neurons simultaneously and to population activity of unresolved cellular origin, respectively. In parallel, optogenetics has demonstrated that targeting neuronal cells with photosensitive microbial opsins, enables the transduction of photons into electrical currents of opposite polarities thus writing, through activation or inhibition, neuronal signals in a non-invasive way. These progresses have in turn stimulated the development of sophisticated optical methods to increase spatial and temporal resolution, light penetration depth and imaging volume. Today, nonlinear microscopy, combined with spatio-temporal wave front shaping, endoscopic probes engineering or multi scan heads design, enable in vivo in depth, simultaneous recording of thousands of cells in mm 3 volumes at single-spike precision and single-cell resolution. Joint progress in opsin engineering, wave front shaping and laser development have provided the methodology, that we named circuits optogenetics, to control single or multiple target activity independently in space and time with single- neuron and single-spike precision, at large depths. Here, we will review the most significant breakthroughs of the past years, which enable reading and writing neuronal activity at the relevant spatiotemporal scale for brain circuits manipulation, with particular emphasis on the most recent advances in circuit optogenetics.

How does a circuit of neurons process sensory information? And how are transformations of neural signals altered by changes in synaptic strength? We investigate these questions in the context of the visual system and the lateral line of fish. A distinguishing feature of our approach is the imaging of activity across populations of synapses – the fundamental elements of signal transfer within all brain circuits. A guiding hypothesis is that the plasticity of neurotransmission plays a major part in controlling the input-output relation of sensory circuits, regulating the tuning and sensitivity of neurons to allow adaptation or sensitization to particular features of the input. Sensory systems continuously adjust their input-output relation according to the recent history of the stimulus. A common alteration is a decrease in the gain of the response to a constant feature of the input, termed adaptation. For instance, in the retina, many of the ganglion cells (RGCs) providing the output produce their strongest responses just after the temporal contrast of the stimulus increases, but the response declines if this input is maintained. The advantage of adaptation is that it prevents saturation of the response to strong stimuli and allows for continued signaling of future increases in stimulus strength. But adaptation comes at a cost: a reduced sensitivity to a future decrease in stimulus strength. The retina compensates for this loss of information through an intriguing strategy: while some RGCs adapt following a strong stimulus, a second population gradually becomes sensitized. We found that the underlying circuit mechanisms involve two opposing forms of synaptic plasticity in bipolar cells: synaptic depression causes adaptation and facilitation causes sensitization. Facilitation is in turn caused by depression in inhibitory synapses providing negative feedback. These opposing forms of plasticity can cause simultaneous increases and decreases in contrast-sensitivity of different RGCs, which suggests a general framework for understanding the function of sensory circuits: plasticity of both excitatory and inhibitory synapses control dynamic changes in tuning and gain.

Impulsivity and compulsivity are behavioural traits that underlie many aspects of decision-making and form the characteristic symptoms of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and Gambling Disorder (GD). The neural underpinnings of aspects of reward and avoidance learning under the expression of these traits and symptoms are only partially understood. " "The present study combined behavioural modelling and neuroimaging technique to examine brain activity associated with critical phases of reward and loss processing in OCD and GD. " "Forty-two healthy controls (HC), forty OCD and twenty-three GD participants were recruited in our study to complete a two-session reinforcement learning (RL) task featuring a “probability switch (PS)” with imaging scanning. Finally, 39 HC (20F/19M, 34 yrs +/- 9.47), 28 OCD (14F/14M, 32.11 yrs ±9.53) and 16 GD (4F/12M, 35.53yrs ± 12.20) were included with both behavioural and imaging data available. The functional imaging was conducted by using 3.0-T SIEMENS MAGNETOM Skyra syngo MR D13C at Monash Biomedical Imaging. Each volume compromised 34 coronal slices of 3 mm thickness with 2000 ms TR and 30 ms TE. A total of 479 volumes were acquired for each participant in each session in an interleaved-ascending manner. " " The standard Q-learning model was fitted to the observed behavioural data and the Bayesian model was used for the parameter estimation. Imaging analysis was conducted using SPM12 (Welcome Department of Imaging Neuroscience, London, United Kingdom) in the Matlab (R2015b) environment. The pre-processing commenced with the slice timing, realignment, normalization to MNI space according to T1-weighted image and smoothing with a 8 mm Gaussian kernel. " " The frontostriatal brain circuit including the putamen and medial orbitofrontal (mOFC) were significantly more active in response to receiving reward and avoiding punishment compared to receiving an aversive outcome and missing reward at 0.001 with FWE correction at cluster level; While the right insula showed greater activation in response to missing rewards and receiving punishment. Compared to healthy participants, GD patients showed significantly lower activation in the left superior frontal and posterior cingulum at 0.001 for the gain omission. " " The reward prediction error (PE) signal was found positively correlated with the activation at several clusters expanding across cortical and subcortical region including the striatum, cingulate, bilateral insula, thalamus and superior frontal at 0.001 with FWE correction at cluster level. The GD patients showed a trend of decreased reward PE response in the right precentral extending to left posterior cingulate compared to controls at 0.05 with FWE correction. " " The aversive PE signal was negatively correlated with brain activity in regions including bilateral thalamus, hippocampus, insula and striatum at 0.001 with FWE correction. Compared with the control group, GD group showed an increased aversive PE activation in the cluster encompassing right thalamus and right hippocampus, and also the right middle frontal extending to the right anterior cingulum at 0.005 with FWE correction. " " Through the reversal learning task, the study provided a further support of the dissociable brain circuits for distinct phases of reward and avoidance learning. Also, the OCD and GD is characterised by aberrant patterns of reward and avoidance processing.

Animals exhibit extraordinary variation in their behaviour, yet little is known about the neural mechanisms that generate this diversity. My lab has been taking advantage of the rapid diversification of male courtship behaviours in Drosophila to gain insight into how evolution shapes the nervous system to generate species-specific behaviours. By translating neurogenetic tools from D. melanogaster to closely related Drosophila species, we have begun to directly compare the homologous neural circuits and pinpoint sites of adaptive change. Across species, P1 interneurons serve as a conserved and key node in regulating male courtship: these neurons are selectively activated by the sensory cues carried by an appropriate mate and their activation triggers enduring courtship displays. We have been examining how different sensory pathways converge onto P1 neurons to regulate a male’s state of arousal, honing his pursuit of a prospective partner. Moreover, by performing cross-species comparison of these circuits, we have begun to gain insight into how reweighting of sensory inputs to P1 neurons underlies species-specific mate recognition. Our results suggest how variation at flexible nodes within the nervous system can serve as a substrate for behavioural evolution, shedding light on the types of changes that are possible and preferable within brain circuits.