Retinal self-organization: a model of RGC and SAC mosaic formation
de Montigny, J.; Sernagor, E.; Bauer, R.
Show abstract
Individual retinal cell types exhibit semi-regular spatial patterns called retinal mosaics. These mosaics enable uniform sampling of visual information and are formed to varying degrees across cell types. Retinal ganglion cells (RGC) and amacrine cells (including starburst amacrine cells (SAC)) are notably known to exhibit such layouts. Mechanisms responsible for the formation of such organised structures and their requirements are still not well understood. Mosaic formation follows three main principles: (1) homotypic cells prevent nearby cells from adopting the same type, (2) cell tangential migration, with homotypic cell repulsion, (3) cell death (with RGCs exhibiting high rates of apoptosis). Here, we use BioDynaMo, an agent-based simulation framework, to build a detailed and mechanistic model of mosaic formation. In particular, we investigate the implications of the three theories for RGCs mosaic formation. We report that the cell migration mechanism yields the most regular mosaics and that cell death can create regular mosaics only if the death rate is kept below 30%, after which cell death has a negative impact on mosaic regularity. In addition, and in accordance with recent studies, we propose here that low density RGC type mosaics exhibit on average low regularities, and thus we question the relevance of regular spacing as a criterion for a group of RGCs to form a RGC type. We also investigate SAC mosaics formation and possible interactions between the ganglion cell layer (GCL) and inner nuclear layer (INL) populations. Investigations are conducted both experimentally and by applying our simulation model to the SAC population. We report that homotypic interactions between the GCL and INL populations during mosaics creation are required to reproduce the observed SAC mosaics characteristics. This suggests that the GCL and INL populations of SACs might not be independent during retinal development. Author SummaryRetinal function depends on cells self-organisation during early development. Understanding the mechanisms underlying this self-organisation could improve not only our comprehension of the retina and its development but also of the cortex. Ultimately, this could lead to novel therapeutic approaches for developmental diseases. Computational models can be of precious help to study this process of self-organisation, given that they are biologically plausible. In this sense, it is important that implemented developmental mechanisms follow the principle of locally available information, without any global knowledge or external supervisor. Here, we follow this principle to investigate mosaic formation during retinal development. In this work, we demonstrate that tangential migration is the only mechanism able to form regular mosaics and that the GCL/INL SAC populations might not be independent during their mosaic formation. More, we question the relevance of regular spacing for RGC types classification.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving the understanding of cytoneme-mediated morphogen gradients by in silico modeling 94%
- GABAergic neurons can facilitate the propagation of cortical spreading depolarization: experiments in mouse neocortical slices and a novel neural field computational model 94%
- Interkinetic nuclear movements promote apical expansion in pseudostratified epithelia at the expense of apicobasal elongation 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Experimental and modeling study of the formation of cell aggregates with differential substrate adhesion 92%
- Using a continuum model to decipher the mechanics of embryonic tissue spreading from time-lapse image sequences: An approximate Bayesian computation approach 92%
- Remodeling mechanisms determine size distributions in developing retinal vasculature 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.