Roundabout receptor 2 maintains inhibitory control of the adult midbrain

  1. Bryan B Gore
  2. Samara M Miller
  3. Yong Sang Jo
  4. Madison Baird
  5. Mrinalini Hoon
  6. Christina A Sanford
  7. Avery Hunker
  8. Weining Lu
  9. Rachel O Wong
  10. Larry S Zweifel  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Washington, United Kingdom
  2. University of Washington, United States
  3. Boston University Medical Center, United States

Abstract

The maintenance of excitatory and inhibitory balance in the brain is essential for its function. Here we find that the developmental axon guidance receptor Roundabout 2 (Robo2) is critical for the maintenance of inhibitory synapses in the adult ventral tegmental area (VTA), a brain region important for the production of the neurotransmitter dopamine. Following selective genetic inactivation of Robo2 in the adult VTA of mice, reduced inhibitory control results in altered neural activity patterns, enhanced phasic dopamine release, behavioral hyperactivity, associative learning deficits, and a paradoxical inversion of psychostimulant responses. These behavioral phenotypes could be phenocopied by selective inactivation of synaptic transmission from local GABAergic neurons of the VTA, demonstrating an important function for Robo2 in regulating the excitatory and inhibitory balance of the adult brain.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Bryan B Gore

    Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Samara M Miller

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Yong Sang Jo

    Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Madison Baird

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Mrinalini Hoon

    Department of Biological Structure, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Christina A Sanford

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Avery Hunker

    Department of Pharmacology, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Weining Lu

    Department of Medicine, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Rachel O Wong

    Department of Biological Structure, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Larry S Zweifel

    Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    For correspondence
    larryz@uw.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3465-5331

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01-MH094536)

  • Larry S Zweifel

National Institute for Health Research (EY10699)

  • Rachel O Wong

National Institute for Health Research (R01-DK078226)

  • Weining Lu

National Institutes of Health (R01-MH104450)

  • Larry S Zweifel

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Eunjoon Kim, Institute for Basic Science, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Korea (South), Republic of

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experiments were done in accordance with a protocol (4249-01) approved by the University of Washington Animal Care and Use Committee.

Version history

  1. Received: December 2, 2016
  2. Accepted: April 9, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: April 10, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: May 5, 2017 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2017, Gore et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,210
    views
  • 244
    downloads
  • 14
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Bryan B Gore
  2. Samara M Miller
  3. Yong Sang Jo
  4. Madison Baird
  5. Mrinalini Hoon
  6. Christina A Sanford
  7. Avery Hunker
  8. Weining Lu
  9. Rachel O Wong
  10. Larry S Zweifel
(2017)
Roundabout receptor 2 maintains inhibitory control of the adult midbrain
eLife 6:e23858.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23858

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23858

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Kenta Abe, Yuki Kambe ... Tatsuo Sato
    Research Article

    Midbrain dopamine neurons impact neural processing in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) through mesocortical projections. However, the signals conveyed by dopamine projections to the PFC remain unclear, particularly at the single-axon level. Here, we investigated dopaminergic axonal activity in the medial PFC (mPFC) during reward and aversive processing. By optimizing microprism-mediated two-photon calcium imaging of dopamine axon terminals, we found diverse activity in dopamine axons responsive to both reward and aversive stimuli. Some axons exhibited a preference for reward, while others favored aversive stimuli, and there was a strong bias for the latter at the population level. Long-term longitudinal imaging revealed that the preference was maintained in reward- and aversive-preferring axons throughout classical conditioning in which rewarding and aversive stimuli were paired with preceding auditory cues. However, as mice learned to discriminate reward or aversive cues, a cue activity preference gradually developed only in aversive-preferring axons. We inferred the trial-by-trial cue discrimination based on machine learning using anticipatory licking or facial expressions, and found that successful discrimination was accompanied by sharper selectivity for the aversive cue in aversive-preferring axons. Our findings indicate that a group of mesocortical dopamine axons encodes aversive-related signals, which are modulated by both classical conditioning across days and trial-by-trial discrimination within a day.

    1. Neuroscience
    Baiwei Liu, Zampeta-Sofia Alexopoulou, Freek van Ede
    Research Article

    Working memory enables us to bridge past sensory information to upcoming future behaviour. Accordingly, by its very nature, working memory is concerned with two components: the past and the future. Yet, in conventional laboratory tasks, these two components are often conflated, such as when sensory information in working memory is encoded and tested at the same location. We developed a task in which we dissociated the past (encoded location) and future (to-be-tested location) attributes of visual contents in working memory. This enabled us to independently track the utilisation of past and future memory attributes through gaze, as observed during mnemonic selection. Our results reveal the joint consideration of past and future locations. This was prevalent even at the single-trial level of individual saccades that were jointly biased to the past and future. This uncovers the rich nature of working memory representations, whereby both past and future memory attributes are retained and can be accessed together when memory contents become relevant for behaviour.