The Sensorimotor Basis of Whisker-Guided Anteroposterior Object Localization in Head-Fixed Mice

Abstract

Highlights d Mice discriminate anteroposterior object locations to % 0.5 mm using a single whisker d Mice locate objects using targeted, noisy exploration that is adaptive to touch d Mice don't use roll angle, precise timing, or distance to locate these objects d Whisking midpoint and the number of touches made best explains localization acuity

Context-Dependent Sensory Processing across Primary and Secondary Somatosensory Cortex

“…Depending on the sample stimulus, whisker angle differed by an average of 1.1 upon rotor re-contact (p < 1 3 10 À6 , paired t test). However, the magnitude of this whisker angle difference was below behaviorally reported thresholds of perceptual discrimination (Cheung et al, 2019). To test whether cued recall activity could be explained by tuning preferences to these whisker features, we compared each neuron's selectivity to touch angle and curvature change to the strength of cued recall response.…”

Generalization of Object Localization From Whiskers to Other Body Parts in Freely Moving Rats

“…Tactile object localization with non-whisker body parts has not been studied before as most of localization studies were done with head-fixed or nose-pocking rodents (Ahissar and Knutsen, 2008; Knutsen and Ahissar, 2009; O’Connor et al, 2010; Kleinfeld and Deschênes, 2011; Bush et al, 2016; Cheung et al, 2019). The use of freely moving rats here allowed the examination of their behavior in conditions that are closer to their natural behavior.…”

“…The most natural set of variables are the whisker-centric polar coordinates: azimuth and radial distance (Knutsen and Ahissar, 2009; Ahissar and Knutsen, 2011). It turned out that the vibrissal system can code these variables in more than a single way (Cheung et al, 2019). Two plausible coding schemes are the so-called orthogonal and morphological schemes.…”

“…Two major constrains limit the interpretation of the results of laboratory localization experiments. First, in most experiments rodents’ perceptual behavior has been constrained in some way, ranging from rigid head fixation (Deutsch et al, 2012; Pammer et al, 2013; Moore et al, 2015; Urbain et al, 2015; Cheung et al, 2019) to requiring nose-poking at a fixed position (Knutsen et al, 2006). Second, training may guide the animals to use strategies that are specific to the trained environment and protocol.…”

A characterization of the electrophysiological, morphological and input domains of vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) interneurons in the medial entorhinal cortex (MEC)

“…Additionally, Me5 encodes whisking movements of micro vibrissae (Mameli, Caria, Biagi, Zedda, & Farina, 2017;Mameli et al, 2014), but more specifically the mid-point of whisking (Severson, Xu, Yang, & O'Connor, 2019). Most relevant to the role of the MEC in supporting navigation, whisking mid-point provides the best estimations for localization of objects in space (Cheung, Maire, Kim, Sy, & Hires, 2019), a function that requires stellate cells in LII of the MEC (Tennant et al, 2018). Whisking and movements of oro-facial muscles are behavioural features seen during active exploration and are thus may constitute an important aspect of rodent navigational strategies (Huet and Hartmann 2014;Wills, Muessig, and Cacucci 2014;Lebedev, Pimashkin, and Ossadtchi 2018).…”