Encoding of motion in real time by the fly visual system

Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 454-460

  Egelhaaf, Martin ^a   Warzecha, Anne Kathrin ^a  

^a BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACTION POTENTIAL; DENDRITE; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; FLY; LOCOMOTION; MOTION; NERVE CELL; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEPTIVE FIELD; REVIEW; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; VISUAL SYSTEM;

EID: 0033178544     PISSN: 09594388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-4388(99)80068-3     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. 1. Tolhurst DJ, Movshon JA, Thompson ID: The dependence of response amplitude and variance of cat visual cortical neurones on stimulus contrast. Exp Brain Res 1981, 41:414-419.
2. 2. Britten KH, Shadlen MN, Newsome WT, Movshon JA: Responses of neurons in macaque MT to stochastic motion signals. Vis Neurosci 1993, 10:1157-1169.
3. 3. Egelhaaf M, Borst A: A look into the cockpit of the fly: visual orientation, algorithms, and identified neurons. J Neurosci 1993, 13:4563-4574.
4. 4. Laughlin SB: Matching coding, circuits, cells, and molecules to signals: general principles of retinal design in the fly's eye. In Progress in Retinal and Eye Research. London: Pergamon Press Ltd; 1994:165-196.
5. 5 . Juusola M, French AS, Uusitalo RO, Weckström M: Information processing by graded-potential transmission through tonically active synapses. Trends Neurosci 1996, 19:292-297.
6. 6 . Hateren JH: Processing of natural time series of intensities by the visual system of the blowfly. Vision Res 1997, 37:3407-3416.
7. 7. Strausfeld NJ: Beneath the compound eye: neuroanatomical analysis and physiological correlates in the study of insect vision. In Facets of Vision. Edited by Stavenga DG, Hardie RC. Berlin: Springer; 1989:317-359.
8. 8. Strausfeld NJ, Lee J-K: Neuronal basis for parallel visual processing in the fly. Vis Neurosci 1991, 7:13-33.
9. 9. Fischbach K-F, Dittrich APM: The optic lobe of Drosophila melanogaster. I. A Golgi analysis of wild-type structure. Cell Tissue Res 1989, 258:441-475.
10. 10. Bausenwein B, Dittrich APM, Fischbach K-F: The optic lobe of Drosophila melanogaster. II. Sorting of retinotopic pathways in the medulla. Cell Tissue Res 1992, 267:17-28.
11. 11. DeVoe RD: Movement sensitivities of cells in the fly's medulla. J Comp Physiol 1980, 138:93-119.
12. 12. Gilbert C, Penisten DK, DeVoe RD: Discrimination of visual motion from flicker by identified neurons in the medulla of the fleshfly Sarcophaga bullata. J Comp Physiol [A] 1991, 168:653-673.
13. 13. Douglass JK, Straussfeld NJ: Visual motion detection circuits in flies: peripheral motion computation by identified small field retinotopic neurons. J Neurosci 1995, 15:5596-5611.
14. 14. Douglass JK, Strausfeld NJ: Visual motion-detection circuits in flies: parallel direction-and non-direction-sensitive pathways between the medulla lobula plate. J Neurosci 1996, 16:4551-4562.
15. 15. Douglass JK, Strausfeld NJ: Functionally and anatomically segregated visual pathways in the lobula complex of a calliphorid fly. J Comp Neurol 1998, 396:84-104.
16. 16. Bausenwein B, Fischbach K-F: Activity labeling patterns in the medulla of Drosophila caused by motion stimuli. Cell Tissue Res 1992, 270:25-35.
17. 17. Hausen K: The lobula-complex of the fly: structure, function and significance in visual behaviour. In Photoreception and Vision in Invertebrates. Edited by Ali MA. New York: Plenum Press; 1984:523-559.
18. 18. Hausen K, Egelhaaf M: Neural mechanisms of visual course control in insects. In Facets of Vision. Edited by Stavenga D, Hardie R. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1989:391-424.
19. 19. Brotz T, Borst A: Cholinergic and GABAergic receptors on fly tangential cells and their role in visual motion detection. J Neurophysiol 1996, 76:1786-1799.
20. 20. Egelhaaf M, Borst A: Movement detection in arthropods. In Visual Motion and its Role in the Stabilization of Gaze. Edited by Wallman J, Miles FA. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1993:53-77.
21. 21. Krapp HG, Hengstenberg R: Estimation of self-motion by optic flow processing in single visual interneurons. Nature 1996, 384:463-466.
22. 22. Krapp HG, Hengstenberg B, Hengstenberg R: Dendritic structure and receptive-field organization of optic flow processing interneurons in the fly. J Neurophysiol 1998, 79:1902-1917. An ensemble of 10 identified motion-sensitive neurons in the fly was systematically characterised, both functionally and anatomically. It is shown that these cells do not have a constant preferred direction of motion throughout their receptive fields. Instead, the preferred directions and local motion sensitivities change in a systematic way that resembles the optic flow that would be induced by the fly during rotations around various horizontal axes. Owing to their sophisticated spatial input organisation, these cells can be interpreted as specialised neural filters for optic flow processing.
23. 23. Karmeier K, Krapp H, Egelhaaf M: Does the receptive field organization of a blowfly visual interneuron depend on visual experience? In Proceedings of the 27th Göttingen Neurobiology Conference 1999. Edited by Elsner N, Eysel U. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1999:441.
24. 24. Egelhaaf M, Borst A, Reichardt W: Computational structure of a biological motion detection system as revealed by local detector analysis in the fly's nervous system. J Opt Soc Am [A] 1989, 6:1070-1087.
25. 25. Single S, Borst A: Dendritic integration and its role in computing image velocity. Science 1998, 281:1848-1850. Local motion-sensitive elements in the fly visual system do not show constant response amplitudes, even when the stimulus pattern is moved at a constant velocity. The modulations of the responses of local motion-sensitive elements are cancelled out by spatial pooling in the dendrites of the TCs. This functional consequence of dendritic integration is visualised by optical recording techniques using calcium as a reporter of the spatio-temporal activity distribution, and nicely corroborates more indirect earlier findings [24].
26. 26. Borst A, Egelhaaf M, Haag J: Mechanisms of dendritic integration underlying gain control in fly motion-sensitive interneurons. J Comput Neurosci 1995, 2:5-18.
27. 27. Single S, Haag J, Borst A: Dendritic computation of direction selectivity and gain control in visual interneurons. J Neurosci 1997, 17:6023-6030.
28. 28. Egelhaaf M, Borst A: Calcium accumulation in visual interneurons of the fly: stimulus dependence and relationship to membrane potential. J Neurophysiol 1995, 73:2540-2552.
29. 29. Haag J, Theunissen F, Borst A: The intrinsic electrophysiological characteristics of fly lobula plate tangential cells: II. Active membrane properties. J Comput Neurosci 1997, 4:349-369.
30. 30. Dürr V, Egelhaaf M: In vivo calcium accumulation in presynaptic and postsynaptic dendrites of visual interneurons. J Neurophysiol 1999, in press.
31. 31. Hengstenberg R: Spike responses of 'non-spiking' visual interneurone. Nature 1977, 270:338-340.
32. 32. Hausen K: Motion sensitive interneurons in the optomotor system of the fly. I. The horizontal cells: structure and signals. Biol Cybern 1982, 45:143-156.
33. 33. Warzecha A-K: Reliability of neuronal information processing in the motion pathway of the blowflies Calliphora erythrocephala and Lucilia cuprina [PhD thesis]. Tübingen: Universität Tübingen; 1994.
34. 34. Warzecha A-K, Egelhaaf M: Neuronal encoding of visual motion in real-time. In Processing Visual Motion in the Real World: A Survey of Computational, Neural, and Ecological Constraints. Edited by Zanker JM, Zeil J. Heidelberg: Springer; 1999: in press.
35. 35. Haag J, Borst A: Encoding of visual motion information and reliability in spiking and graded potential neurons. J Neurosci 1997, 17:4809-4819.
36. 36. Egelhaaf M, Reichardt W: Dynamic response properties of movement detectors: theoretical analysis and electrophysiological investigation in the visual system of the fly. Biol Cybern 1987, 56:69-87.
37. 37. Haag J, Borst A: Active membrane properties and signal encoding in graded potential neurons. J Neurosci 1998, 18:7972-7986. Using intracellular recording and information theoretical approaches, the authors analysed the significance of graded membrane potentials and spikes in representing motion. They examined a TC in the fly that responds conjointly with both response modes. They concluded that the cell performs best when both types of responses are considered than when either (exclusively) is taken into account.
38. 38. Laughlin SB, de Ruyter van Steveninck RR, Anderson JC: The metabolic cost of neural information. Nat Neurosci 1998, 1:36-41. This paper stresses that the way information is computed by the nervous system may be constrained not only by the computational tasks but also by the metabolic costs of different coding strategies (e.g. spiking versus graded). Although many assumptions have been made in relating the information transmission rate to its metabolic cost, the consideration of energy consumption represents an important aspect that has largely been disregarded so far in the context of neural coding.
39. 39. Warzecha A-K, Egelhaaf M: Variability of neural responses during constant and dynamical stimulation. Science 1999, 283:1927-1930. In the fly, the variances in the responses of the H1-neuron, a spiking TC, to constant velocity stimuli and to more naturalistic dynamical stimuli do not differ systematically. The variances of the responses to both types of stimuli are much smaller than the mean spike count (apart from low activities). This study refutes the claim of an earlier paper [40] showing that responses to dynamical stimuli are processed more reliably than those to constant stimuli.
40. 40. de Ruyter van Steveninck RR, Lewen GD, Strong SP, Koberle R, Bialek W: Reproducibility and variability in neural spike trains. Science 1997, 275:1805-1808.
41. 41. Warzecha A-K, Kretzberg J, Egelhaaf M: Temporal precision of encoding of motion information by visual interneurons. Curr Biol 1998, 8:359-368. By simultaneously recording from a pair of spiking TCs in the fly, the authors show that spikes are locked to the motion stimulus on a coarse timescale of tens of milliseconds. The timing of spikes on a millisecond scale is mainly controlled by stochastic membrane potential fluctuations. The latter predominate over the motion-induced membrane potential changes at a frequency range at which spikes are elicited most efficiently (above approximately 20 Hz). As a consequence of time constants, which are inherent in any mechanism of motion detection [20], high-frequency velocity fluctuations are attenuated much more than low-frequency ones. It is proposed that, from an ecological point of view, there is no need to time-lock spikes to motion stimuli on a millisecond scale because velocity changes of moving objects are limited as a consequence of inertia and friction.
42. 42. Mainen ZF, Sejnowski TJ: Reliability of spike timing in neocortical neurons. Science 1995, 268:1503-1506.
43. 43. Haag J, Borst A: Amplification of high frequency synaptic inputs by active dendritic membrane processes. Nature 1996, 379:639-641.
44. 44. Nowak LG, Sanchez-Vives MV, McCormick DA: Influence of low and high frequency inputs on spike timing in visual cortical neurons. Cereb Cortex 1997, 7:487-501.
45. 45. Carr CE, Friedman MA: Evolution of time coding systems. Neural Computt 1999, 11:1-20.
46. 46. Schilstra C, van Hateren JH: Stabilizing gaze in flying blowflies. Nature 1998, 395:654. See annotation [48••].
47. 47. Schilstra C, van Hateren JH: Blowfly flight and optic flow. I. Thorax kinematics and flight dynamics. J Exp Biol 1999, 202:1481-1490. See annotation [48••].
48. 48. van Hateren JH, Schilstra C: Blowfly flight and optic flow. II. Head movements during flight. J Exp Biol 1999, 202:1491-1500. With an elegant magnetic coil technique, the position and orientation of the thorax and the head of (almost) freely flying flies can be monitored virtually without limitations on temporal resolution. Using this technique, the authors show that during spontaneous flight, head turns are somewhat faster than the turns of the body. These changes in head and body position set the upper limit for the changes in direction of motion that are perceived by the fly as a consequence of self-motion.
49. 49. Bialek W, Rieke F, de Ruyter van Steveninck RR, Warland D: Reading a neural code. Science 1991, 252:1854-1857.
50. 50. Warzecha A-K, Egelhaaf M: How reliably does a neuron in the visual motion pathway of the fly encode behaviourally relevant information? Eur J Neurosci 1997, 9:1365-1374.
51. 51. de Ruyter van Steveninck RR, Bialek W: Real-time performance of a movement-sensitive neuron in the blowfly visual system: coding and information transfer in short spike sequences. Proc R Soc Lond [Biol] 1988, 234:379-414.
52. 52. de Ruyter van Steveninck RR, Bialek W: Reliability and statistical efficiency of a blowfly movement-sensitive neuron. Philos Trans R Soc Lond [Biol] 1995, 348:321-340.
53. 53. Strong SP, Koberle R, de Ruyter van Steveninck RR, Bialek W: Entropy and information in neural spike trains. Phys Rev Lett 1998, 80:197-200. This thorough mathematical analysis quantifies the information transmitted by a spiking TC of the fly, the H1-neuron, about time-varying visual motion. The authors show how the value calculated for the transmitted information depends on the temporal resolution used for data evaluation. This dependence should be taken into account when quantitative measures for the transmitted information are compared between different studies and systems.
54. 54. Warzecha A-K, Egelhaaf M: On the performance of biological movement detectors and ideal velocity sensors in the context of optomotor course stabilization. Vis Neurosci 1998, 15:113-122.
55. 55. Maddess T, Laughlin SB: Adaptation of the motion-sensitive neuron H1 is generated locally and governed by contrast frequency. Proc R Soc Land [Biol] 1985, 225:251-275.
56. 56. de Ruyter van Steveninck RR, Zaagman WH, Mastebroek HAK: Adaptation of transient responses of a movement-sensitive neuron in the visual system of the blowfly, Calliphora erythrocephala. Biol Cybern 1986, 54:223-236.
57. 57. Harris RA, O'Carroll DC, Laughlin SB: Adaptation and the temporal delay filter of fly motion detectors. Vis Res 1999, 39:2603-2613.
58. 2+ signals in visual motion sensitive neurons of the blowfly (Calliphora erythrocephala). In Proceedings of the 27th Göttingen Neurobiology Conference 1999. Edited by Elsner N, Eysel U. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1999:445.
59. 59. Heinrich B: The Hot-blooded Insects. Berlin: Springer; 1993.
60. 60. Stavenga DG, Schwering PBW, Tinbergen J: A three-compartment model describing temperature changes in tethered flying blowflies. J Exp Biol 1993, 185:326-333.
61. 61. Warzecha A-K, Horstmann W, Egelhaaf M: Temperature dependence of neuronal performance in the motion pathway of the fly. J Exp Biol 1999, in press.
62. 62. O'Carroll DC, Bidwell NJ, Laughlin SB, Warrant EJ: Insect motion detectors matched to visual ecology. Nature 1996, 382:63-66.
63. 63. O'Carroll DC, Laughlin SB, Bidwell NJ, Harris RA: Spatio-temporal properties of motion detectors matched to low image velocities in hovering insects. Vis Res 1997, 37:3427-3439.
64. 64. Kimmerle B: Object detection by the fly Lucilia: behavioral experiments in the flight simulator and performance of visual interneurons [PhD thesis]. Bielefeld: University Bielefeld; 1999.
65. 65. Kern R, Lorenz S, Lutterklas M, Egelhaaf M: How do fly interneurons respond to optic flow experienced in 3D-environments? In Proceedings of the 27th Göttingen Neurobiology Conference 1999. Edited by Elsner N, Eysel U. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1999:439.