4.8 Article

Distinct neural mechanisms construct classical versus extraclassical inhibitory surrounds in an inhibitory nucleus in the midbrain attention network

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 14, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-39073-5

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the role and construction mechanism of inhibitory neurons in the barn owl's midbrain in controlling visual perception and attention. The results show that the classical inhibitory surrounds of Imc neurons are inherited from OT, while the extraclassical inhibitory surrounds are constructed within Imc. These findings reveal the key design principles of the midbrain spatial attention circuit and emphasize the critical importance of competitive interactions within Imc for its operation.
Inhibitory neurons in the midbrain spatial attention network, called isthmi pars magnocellularis (Imc), control stimulus selection by the sensorimotor and attentional hub, the optic tectum (OT). Here, we investigate in the barn owl how classical as well as extraclassical (global) inhibitory surrounds of Imc receptive fields (RFs), fundamental units of Imc computational function, are constructed. We find that focal, reversible blockade of GABAergic input onto Imc neurons disconnects their extraclassical inhibitory surrounds, but leaves intact their classical inhibitory surrounds. Subsequently, with paired recordings and iontophoresis, first at spatially aligned site-pairs in Imc and OT, and then, at mutually distant site-pairs within Imc, we demonstrate that classical inhibitory surrounds of Imc RFs are inherited from OT, but their extraclassical inhibitory surrounds are constructed within Imc. These results reveal key design principles of the midbrain spatial attention circuit and highlight the critical importance of competitive interactions within Imc for its operation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available