title: Closed-loop response properties of a visual interneuron involved in fly optomotor control.
abstract: Due to methodological limitations neural function is mostly studied under open-loop conditions. Normally, however, nervous systems operate in closed-loop where sensory input is processed to generate behavioral outputs, which again change the sensory input. Here, we investigate the closed-loop responses of an identified visual interneuron, the blowfly H1-cell, that is part of a neural circuit involved in optomotor flight and gaze control. Those behaviors may be triggered by attitude changes during flight in turbulent air. The fly analyses the resulting retinal image shifts and performs compensatory body and head rotations to regain its default attitude. We developed a fly robot interface to study H1-cell responses in a 1 degree-of-freedom image stabilization task. Image shifts, induced by externally forced rotations, modulate the cell's spike rate that controls counter rotations of a mobile robot to minimize relative motion between the robot and its visual surroundings. A feedback controller closed the loop between neural activity and the rotation of the robot. Under these conditions we found the following H1-cell response properties: (i) the peak spike rate decreases when the mean image velocity is increased, (ii) the relationship between spike rate and image velocity depends on the standard deviation of the image velocities suggesting adaptive scaling of the cell's signaling range, and (iii) the cell's gain decreases linearly with increasing image accelerations. Our results reveal a remarkable qualitative similarity between the response dynamics of the H1-cell under closed-loop conditions with those obtained in previous open-loop experiments. Finally, we show that the adaptive scaling of the H1-cell's responses, while maximizing information on image velocity, decreases the cell's sensitivity to image accelerations. Understanding such trade-offs in biological vision systems may advance the design of smart vision sensors for autonomous robots.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London London, UK ; Department of Bioengineering, Imperial College London London, UK.
authors.forename: Naveed
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Ejaz
authors.forename: Holger G
authors.initials: HG
authors.lastname: Krapp
authors.forename: Reiko J
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Tanaka
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D004175:Diptera; D005260:Female; D007395:Interneurons / Q000502:physiology*; D009415:Nerve Net / Q000502:physiology*; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods*; D012371:Robotics / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D014795:Visual Pathways / Q000502:physiology*; D014796:Visual Perception / Q000502:physiology*
keywords: blowfly; brain machine interface; closed-loop system; electrophysiology; motion vision; optic flow; optomotor control
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2001 Aug;11(4):475-80
references.pmid: 11502395
references.citation: Neuron. 2000 Jun;26(3):695-702
references.pmid: 10896164
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 1998 May;1(1):36-41
references.pmid: 10195106
references.citation: J Neural Eng. 2006 Sep;3(3):R25-35
references.pmid: 16921200
references.citation: Kybernetik. 1964 Jun;2(2):77-92
references.pmid: 5833196
references.citation: Nature. 2001 Aug 23;412(6849):787-92
references.pmid: 11518957
references.citation: J Comput Neurosci. 2003 Jan-Feb;14(1):23-31
references.pmid: 12435922
references.citation: Rev Oculomot Res. 1993;5:239-63
references.pmid: 8420551
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2001 Aug 1;21(15):5685-92
references.pmid: 11466440
references.citation: Science. 1998 Apr 10;280(5361):289-92
references.pmid: 9535659
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2000 Nov;3 Suppl:1212-7
references.pmid: 11127840
references.citation: Network. 2001 Aug;12(3):317-29
references.pmid: 11563532
references.citation: J Vis Exp. 2011 Mar 10;(49):
references.pmid: 21445031
references.citation: Physiol Rev. 2011 Apr;91(2):413-60
references.pmid: 21527730
references.citation: Rev Oculomot Res. 1993;5:203-35
references.pmid: 8420550
references.citation: Kybernetik. 1968 Jun;4(6):199-208
references.pmid: 5731498
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2001 Feb;85(2):724-34
references.pmid: 11160507
references.citation: Vision Res. 2003 May;43(11):1291-307
references.pmid: 12726835
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Apr 26;102(17):6172-6
references.pmid: 15833815
references.citation: Rev Oculomot Res. 1993;5:265-83
references.pmid: 8420552
references.citation: Trends Neurosci. 2004 May;27(5):278-82
references.pmid: 15111010
references.citation: Biol Cybern. 2010 Nov;103(5):353-64
references.pmid: 20694561
references.citation: J Comp Physiol A. 1990 Jul;167(2):269-83
references.pmid: 2120434
references.citation: J Exp Biol. 2010 Sep;213(Pt 17):3047-61
references.pmid: 20709933
references.citation: J Comp Physiol A. 1987 Sep;161(4):533-47
references.pmid: 3681769
references.citation: J Comp Physiol A. 2000 Jan;186(1):45-55
references.pmid: 10659042