4.5 Article

Plasticity between visual input pathways and the head direction system

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN NEUROBIOLOGY
卷 71, 期 -, 页码 60-68

出版社

CURRENT BIOLOGY LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2021.08.006

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Eye Institute of the National Institutes of Health [DP2EY032737]
  2. Searle Scholars Program (Kinship Foundation)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Animals are able to maintain a stable sense of direction in novel environments by interpreting and encoding unfamiliar sensory information in their navigation system. Both mammals and insects have evolved distinct brain structures to share computational principles for solving this common problem, with a key structure being the ring attractor. Initially, animals rely on self-motion cues in unfamiliar environments, but over time, they establish a mapping from visual inputs to head direction cells through experience-dependent plasticity.
Animals can maintain a stable sense of direction even when they navigate in novel environments, but how the animal's brain interprets and encodes unfamiliar sensory information in its navigation system to maintain a stable sense of direction is a mystery. Recent studies have suggested that distinct brain structures of mammals and insects have evolved to solve this common problem with strategies that share computational principles; specifically, a network structure called a ring attractor maintains the sense of direction. Initially, in a novel environment, the animal's sense of direction relies on self-motion cues. Over time, the mapping from visual inputs to head direction cells, responsible for the sense of direction, is established via experience-dependent plasticity. Yet the mechanisms that facilitate acquiring a world-centered sense of direction, how many environments can be stored in memory, and what visual features are selected, all remain unknown. Thanks to recent advances in large scale physiological recording, genetic tools, and theory, these mechanisms may soon be revealed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据