Back

Loom response in mouse superior colliculus depends on sensorimotor context

Zucca, S.; Schulz, A.; Goncalves, P. J.; Macke, J. H.; Saleem, A. B.; Solomon, S. G.

2024-12-12 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.12.06.627189 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Visual motion is produced both by an organisms movement through the world, and by objects moving in the world such as potential predators. Choosing appropriate behaviour therefore requires organisms to distinguish these sources of visual motion. Here we asked how mice integrate self-movement with looming visual motion by combining virtual reality and neural recordings from superior colliculus (SC), a brain area important in visually-guided approach and avoidance behaviours. We first measured locomotion behaviour and neural activity while animals approached an object in virtual reality, and while the same object loomed at them. In both cases, vision dominated activity in superficial layers (SCs), while locomotion had more influence on activity in intermediate layers (SCim). In addition, animals instinctively slowed their locomotion when nearing the object, or when the object neared them. To directly test animals ability to distinguish self-from object motion we replayed the visual images generated during object approach. Locomotion behaviour often changed during replay, showing animals are able to establish if visual motion is matched to their self-movement. Further, decoders trained on locomotion behaviour, or on population activity in SC, particularly in SCim, were able to reliably discriminate epochs of replay and object approach. We conclude that both mouse behaviour and SC activity encode whether looming visual motion arises from self-or object movement, with implications for understanding sensorimotor coordination in dynamic environments. HighlightsO_LIWe recorded from superficial (SCs) and intermediate (SCim) superior colliculus in VR C_LIO_LIVision dominated SCs, while SCim was modulated by both vision and locomotion C_LIO_LIMice altered behaviour when visual experience did not match that expected from their locomotion C_LIO_LIPopulation activity differed between matched and unmatched visual experiences, particularly in SCim C_LI

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.