@article {68225, title = {Neuronal circuits integrating visual motion information in Drosophila melanogaster.}, journal = {Current Biology}, volume = {32}, year = {2022}, month = {2022 Aug 22}, pages = {3529-3544}, abstract = {

The detection of visual motion enables sophisticated animal navigation, and studies on flies have provided profound insights into the cellular and circuit bases of this neural computation. The fly{\textquoteright}s directionally selective T4 and T5 neurons encode ON and OFF motion, respectively. Their axons terminate in one of the four retinotopic layers in the lobula plate, where each layer encodes one of the four directions of motion. Although the input circuitry of the directionally selective neurons has been studied in detail, the synaptic connectivity of circuits integrating T4/T5 motion signals is largely unknown. Here, we report a 3D electron microscopy reconstruction, wherein we comprehensively identified T4/T5{\textquoteright}s synaptic partners in the lobula plate, revealing a diverse set of new cell types and attributing new connectivity patterns to the known cell types. Our reconstruction explains how the ON- and OFF-motion pathways converge. T4 and T5 cells that project to the same layer connect to common synaptic partners and comprise a core motif together with bilayer interneurons, detailing the circuit basis for computing motion opponency. We discovered pathways that likely encode new directions of motion by integrating vertical and horizontal motion signals from upstream T4/T5 neurons. Finally, we identify substantial projections into the lobula, extending the known motion pathways and suggesting that directionally selective signals shape feature detection there. The circuits we describe enrich the anatomical basis for experimental and computations analyses of motion vision and bring us closer to understanding complete sensory-motor pathways.

}, issn = {1879-0445}, doi = {10.1016/j.cub.2022.06.061}, author = {Shinomiya, Kazunori and Nern, Aljoscha and Meinertzhagen, Ian A and Plaza, Stephen M and Reiser, Michael B} } @article {67772, title = {A connectome is not enough - what is still needed to understand the brain of Drosophila?}, journal = {The Journal of Experimental Biology}, volume = {224}, year = {2021}, month = {2021 Nov 01}, abstract = {

Understanding the structure and operation of any nervous system has been a subject of research for well over a century. A near-term opportunity in this quest is to understand the brain of a model species, the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. This is an enticing target given its relatively small size (roughly 200,000 neurons), coupled with the behavioral richness that this brain supports, and the wide variety of techniques now available to study both brain and behavior. It is clear that within a few years we will possess a connectome for D. melanogaster: an electron-microscopy-level description of all neurons and their chemical synaptic connections. Given what we will soon have, what we already know and the research that is currently underway, what more do we need to know to enable us to understand the fly{\textquoteright}s brain? Here, we itemize the data we will need to obtain, collate and organize in order to build an integrated model of the brain of D. melanogaster.

}, issn = {1477-9145}, doi = {10.1242/jeb.242740}, author = {Scheffer, Louis K and Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {68507, title = {A connectome and analysis of the adult Drosophila central brain.}, journal = {Elife}, volume = {9}, year = {2020}, month = {2020 Sep 07}, abstract = {

The neural circuits responsible for animal behavior remain largely unknown. We summarize new methods and present the circuitry of a large fraction of the brain of the fruit fly . Improved methods include new procedures to prepare, image, align, segment, find synapses in, and proofread such large data sets. We define cell types, refine computational compartments, and provide an exhaustive atlas of cell examples and types, many of them novel. We provide detailed circuits consisting of neurons and their chemical synapses for most of the central brain. We make the data public and simplify access, reducing the effort needed to answer circuit questions, and provide procedures linking the neurons defined by our analysis with genetic reagents. Biologically, we examine distributions of connection strengths, neural motifs on different scales, electrical consequences of compartmentalization, and evidence that maximizing packing density is an important criterion in the evolution of the fly{\textquoteright}s brain.

}, keywords = {Animals, Brain, Connectome, Drosophila melanogaster, Female, Male, Neurons, Synapses}, issn = {2050-084X}, doi = {10.7554/eLife.57443}, author = {Scheffer, Louis K and Xu, C Shan and Januszewski, Michal and Lu, Zhiyuan and Takemura, Shin-ya and Hayworth, Kenneth J and Huang, Gary B and Shinomiya, Kazunori and Maitlin-Shepard, Jeremy and Berg, Stuart and Clements, Jody and Hubbard, Philip M and Katz, William T and Umayam, Lowell and Zhao, Ting and Ackerman, David and Blakely, Tim and Bogovic, John and Dolafi, Tom and Kainmueller, Dagmar and Kawase, Takashi and Khairy, Khaled A and Leavitt, Laramie and Li, Peter H and Lindsey, Larry and Neubarth, Nicole and Olbris, Donald J and Otsuna, Hideo and Trautman, Eric T and Ito, Masayoshi and Bates, Alexander S and Goldammer, Jens and Wolff, Tanya and Svirskas, Robert and Schlegel, Philipp and Neace, Erika and Knecht, Christopher J and Alvarado, Chelsea X and Bailey, Dennis A and Ballinger, Samantha and Borycz, Jolanta A and Canino, Brandon S and Cheatham, Natasha and Cook, Michael and Dreher, Marisa and Duclos, Octave and Eubanks, Bryon and Fairbanks, Kelli and Finley, Samantha and Forknall, Nora and Francis, Audrey and Hopkins, Gary Patrick and Joyce, Emily M and Kim, SungJin and Kirk, Nicole A and Kovalyak, Julie and Lauchie, Shirley A and Lohff, Alanna and Maldonado, Charli and Manley, Emily A and McLin, Sari and Mooney, Caroline and Ndama, Miatta and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Okeoma, Nneoma and Ordish, Christopher and Padilla, Nicholas and Patrick, Christopher M and Paterson, Tyler and Phillips, Elliott E and Phillips, Emily M and Rampally, Neha and Ribeiro, Caitlin and Robertson, Madelaine K and Rymer, Jon Thomson and Ryan, Sean M and Sammons, Megan and Scott, Anne K and Scott, Ashley L and Shinomiya, Aya and Smith, Claire and Smith, Kelsey and Smith, Natalie L and Sobeski, Margaret A and Suleiman, Alia and Swift, Jackie and Takemura, Satoko and Talebi, Iris and Tarnogorska, Dorota and Tenshaw, Emily and Tokhi, Temour and Walsh, John J and Yang, Tansy and Horne, Jane Anne and Li, Feng and Parekh, Ruchi and Rivlin, Patricia K and Jayaraman, Vivek and Costa, Marta and Jefferis, Gregory Sxe and Ito, Kei and Saalfeld, Stephan and George, Reed and Meinertzhagen, Ian A and Rubin, Gerald M and Hess, Harald F and Jain, Viren and Plaza, Stephen M} } @article {51252, title = {Comparisons between the ON- and OFF-edge motion pathways in the brain.}, journal = {eLife}, volume = {8}, year = {2019}, month = {2019 Jan 09}, abstract = {

Understanding the circuit mechanisms behind motion detection is a long-standing question in visual neuroscience. In , recent synapse-level connectomes in the optic lobe, particularly in ON-pathway (T4) receptive-field circuits, in concert with physiological studies, suggest an increasingly intricate motion model compared with the ubiquitous Hassenstein-Reichardt model, while our knowledge of OFF-pathway (T5) has been incomplete. Here we present a conclusive and comprehensive connectome that for the first time integrates detailed connectivity information for inputs to both T4 and T5 pathways in a single EM dataset covering the entire optic lobe. With novel reconstruction methods using automated synapse prediction suited to such a large connectome, we successfully corroborate previous findings in the T4 pathway and comprehensively identify inputs and receptive fields for T5. While the two pathways are likely evolutionarily linked and indeed exhibit many similarities, we uncover interesting differences and interactions that may underlie their distinct functional properties.

}, issn = {2050-084X}, doi = {10.7554/eLife.40025}, author = {Shinomiya, Kazunori and Huang, Gary and Lu, Zhiyuan and Parag, Toufiq and Xu, C Shan and Aniceto, Roxanne and Ansari, Namra and Cheatham, Natasha and Lauchie, Shirley and Neace, Erika and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Ordish, Christopher and Peel, David and Shinomiya, Aya and Smith, Claire and Takemura, Satoko and Talebi, Iris and Rivlin, Patricia K and Nern, Aljoscha and Scheffer, Louis K and Plaza, Stephen M and Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {65060, title = {The fly brain atlas.}, journal = {Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology}, volume = {35}, year = {2019}, month = {2019 Oct 6}, pages = {637-53}, abstract = {

The brain{\textquoteright}s synaptic networks endow an animal with powerfully adaptive biological behavior. Maps of such synaptic circuits densely reconstructed in those model brains, which can be examined and manipulated by genetic means, offer the best prospect for understanding the underlying biological bases of behavior. That prospect is now technologically feasible and a scientifically enabling possibility in neurobiology, much as genomics has been in molecular biology and genetics. In , two major advances are in electron microscopic technology, using focused ion beam-scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM) milling to capture and align digital images, and in computer-aided reconstruction of neuron morphologies. The last decade has witnessed enormous progress in detailed knowledge of the actual synaptic circuits formed by real neurons. Advances in various brain regions that heralded identification of the motion-sensing circuits in the optic lobe are now extending to other brain regions, with the prospect of encompassing the fly{\textquoteright}s entire nervous system, both brain and ventral nerve cord. Expected final online publication date for the Volume 35 is October 7, 2019. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

}, issn = {1530-8995}, doi = {10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100818-125444}, author = {Scheffer, Louis K and Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {65206, title = {The organization of the second optic chiasm of the optic lobe.}, journal = {Frontiers in Neural Circuits}, volume = {13}, year = {2019}, month = {2019 Oct 11}, pages = {65}, abstract = {

Visual pathways from the compound eye of an insect relay to four neuropils, successively the lamina, medulla, lobula, and lobula plate in the underlying optic lobe. Among these neuropils, the medulla, lobula, and lobula plate are interconnected by the complex second optic chiasm, through which the anteroposterior axis undergoes an inversion between the medulla and lobula. Given their complex structure, the projection patterns through the second optic chiasm have so far lacked critical analysis. By densely reconstructing axon trajectories using a volumetric scanning electron microscopy (SEM) technique, we reveal the three-dimensional structure of the second optic chiasm of , which comprises interleaving bundles and sheets of axons insulated from each other by glial sheaths. These axon bundles invert their horizontal sequence in passing between the medulla and lobula. Axons connecting the medulla and lobula plate are also bundled together with them but do not decussate the sequence of their horizontal positions. They interleave with sheets of projection neuron axons between the lobula and lobula plate, which also lack decussations. We estimate that approximately 19,500 cells per hemisphere, about two thirds of the optic lobe neurons, contribute to the second chiasm, most being Tm cells, with an estimated additional 2,780 T4 and T5 cells each. The chiasm mostly comprises axons and cell body fibers, but also a few synaptic elements. Based on our anatomical findings, we propose that a chiasmal structure between the neuropils is potentially advantageous for processing complex visual information in parallel. The EM reconstruction shows not only the structure of the chiasm in the adult brain, the previously unreported main topic of our study, but also suggest that the projection patterns of the neurons comprising the chiasm may be determined by the proliferation centers from which the neurons develop. Such a complex wiring pattern could, we suggest, only have arisen in several evolutionary steps.

}, issn = {1662-5110}, doi = {10.3389/fncir.2019.00065}, author = {Shinomiya, Kazunori and Horne, Jane Anne and McLin, Sari and Wiederman, Meagan and Nern, Aljoscha and Plaza, Stephen M and Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {49235, title = {Of what use is connectomics? A personal perspective on the connectome.}, journal = {The Journal of Experimental Biology}, volume = {221}, year = {2018}, month = {2018 May 20}, abstract = {

The brain is a network of neurons and its biological output is behaviour. This is an exciting age, with a growing acknowledgement that the comprehensive compilation of synaptic circuits densely reconstructed in the brains of model species is now both technologically feasible and a scientifically enabling possibility in neurobiology, much as 30 years ago genomics was in molecular biology and genetics. Implemented by huge advances in electron microscope technology, especially focused ion beam-scanning electron microscope (FIB-SEM) milling (see Glossary), image capture and alignment, and computer-aided reconstruction of neuron morphologies, enormous progress has been made in the last decade in the detailed knowledge of the actual synaptic circuits formed by real neurons, in various brain regions of the fly It is useful to distinguish synaptic pathways that are major, with 100 or more presynaptic contacts, from those that are minor, with fewer than about 10; most neurites are both presynaptic and postsynaptic, and all synaptic sites have multiple postsynaptic dendrites. Work on has spearheaded these advances because cell numbers are manageable, and neuron classes are morphologically discrete and genetically identifiable, many confirmed by reporters. Recent advances are destined within the next few years to reveal the complete connectome in an adult fly, paralleling advances in the larval brain that offer the same prospect possibly within an even shorter time frame. The final amendment and validation of segmented bodies by human proof-readers remains the most time-consuming step, however. The value of a complete connectome in is that, by targeting to specific neurons transgenes that either silence or activate morphologically identified circuits, and then identifying the resulting behavioural outcome, we can determine the causal mechanism for behaviour from its loss or gain. More importantly, the connectome reveals hitherto unsuspected pathways, leading us to seek novel behaviours for these. Circuit information will eventually be required to understand how differences between brains underlie differences in behaviour, and especially to herald yet more advanced connectomic strategies for the vertebrate brain, with an eventual prospect of understanding cognitive disorders having a connectomic basis. Connectomes also help us to identify common synaptic circuits in different species and thus to reveal an evolutionary progression in candidate pathways.

}, issn = {1477-9145}, doi = {10.1242/jeb.164954}, author = {Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {49497, title = {A resource for the antennal lobe provided by the connectome of glomerulus VA1v.}, journal = {eLife}, volume = {7}, year = {2018}, month = {2018 Nov 01}, abstract = {

Using FIB-SEM we report the entire synaptic connectome of glomerulus VA1v of the right antennal lobe in . Within the glomerulus we densely reconstructed all neurons, including hitherto elusive local interneurons. The -positive, sexually dimorphic VA1v included \>11,140 presynaptic sites with ~38,050 postsynaptic dendrites. These connected input olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs, 51 ipsilateral, 56 contralateral), output projection neurons (18 PNs), and local interneurons (56 of \>150 previously reported LNs). ORNs are predominantly presynaptic and PNs predominantly postsynaptic; newly reported LN circuits are largely an equal mixture and confer extensive synaptic reciprocity, except the newly reported LN2V with input from ORNs and outputs mostly to monoglomerular PNs, however. PNs were more numerous than previously reported from genetic screens, suggesting that the latter failed to reach saturation. We report a matrix of 192 bodies each having 50 connections; these form 88\% of the glomerulus{\textquoteright} pre/postsynaptic sites.

}, issn = {2050-084X}, doi = {10.7554/eLife.37550}, author = {Horne, Jane Anne and Langille, Carlie and McLin, Sari and Wiederman, Meagan and Lu, Zhiyuan and Xu, C Shan and Plaza, Stephen M and Scheffer, Louis K and Hess, Harald F and Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {49246, title = {The world of the identified or digital neuron.}, journal = {Journal of Neurogenetics}, year = {2018}, month = {2018 May 23}, pages = {1-6}, abstract = {

In general, neurons in insects and many other invertebrate groups are individually recognizable, enabling us to assign an index number to specific neurons in a manner which is rarely possible in a vertebrate brain. This endows many studies on insect nervous systems with the opportunity to document neurons with great precision, so that in favourable cases we can return to the same neuron or neuron type repeatedly so as to recognize many separate morphological classes. The visual system of the fly{\textquoteright}s compound eye particularly provides clear examples of the accuracy of neuron wiring, allowing numerical comparisons between representatives of the same cell type, and estimates of the accuracy of their wiring.

}, issn = {1563-5260}, doi = {10.1080/01677063.2018.1474214}, author = {Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {48436, title = {The comprehensive connectome of a neural substrate for {\textquoteright}ON{\textquoteright} motion detection in Drosophila.}, journal = {eLife}, volume = {6}, year = {2017}, month = {2017 Apr 22}, abstract = {

Analysing computations in neural circuits often uses simplified models because the actual neuronal implementation is not known. For example, a problem in vision, how the eye detects image motion, has long been analysed using Hassenstein-Reichardt (HR) detector or Barlow-Levick (BL) models. These both simulate motion detection well, but the exact neuronal circuits undertaking these tasks remain elusive. We reconstructed a comprehensive connectome of the circuits of Drosophila{\textquoteright}s motion-sensing T4 cells using a novel EM technique. We uncover complex T4 inputs and reveal that putative excitatory inputs cluster at T4{\textquoteright}s dendrite shafts, while inhibitory inputs localize to the bases. Consistent with our previous study, we reveal that Mi1 and Tm3 cells provide most synaptic contacts onto T4. We are, however, unable to reproduce the spatial offset between these cells reported previously. Our comprehensive connectome reveals complex circuits that include candidate anatomical substrates for both HR and BL types of motion detectors.

}, issn = {2050-084X}, doi = {10.7554/eLife.24394}, author = {Takemura, Shin-ya and Nern, Aljoscha and Chklovskii, Dmitri B and Scheffer, Louis K and Rubin, Gerald M and Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {47600, title = {Connectome studies on Drosophila: a short perspective on a tiny brain.}, journal = {Journal of Neurogenetics}, volume = {30}, year = {2016}, month = {2016 Jun}, pages = {62-8}, abstract = {

The brain is a network of neurons, one that generates behaviour, and knowing the former is crucial to understanding the latter. Identifying the exact network of synaptic connections, or connectome, of the fly{\textquoteright}s central nervous system is now a major objective in Drosophila neurobiology, one that has been initiated in several laboratories, especially the Janelia Research Campus of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Progress is most advanced in the optic neuropiles of the visual system. The effort to derive a connectome from these and other neuropile regions is proceeding by various methods of electron microscopy, especially focused-ion beam milling scanning electron microscopy, and relies upon - but is to be carefully distinguished from - published light microscopic methods that reveal the projections of genetically labelled cell types. The latter reveal those neurons that come into close proximity and are therefore candidate synaptic partners. Synaptic partnerships are not in fact reliably revealed by such candidate pairs, anatomical connections often revealing unexpected pathways. Synaptic partnerships identified from ultrastructural features provide a strong heuristic basis to interpret not only functional interactions between identified neurons, but also a powerful means to predict such interactions, and suggest functional pathways not readily predicted from existing experimental evidence. The analysis of circuit function may proceed cell by cell, by examining the behavioural outcome of either interrupting or restoring function to any one element in an anatomically defined circuit, but can be foiled by degeneracy in pathway elements. Circuit information can also be used to identify and analyse circuit motifs, and their role in higher-order network properties. These attempts in Drosophila anticipate parallel attempts in other systems, notably the inner plexiform layer of the vertebrate retina, and augment the one complete connectome already available to us, that available for 30 years in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans.

}, issn = {1563-5260}, doi = {10.3109/01677063.2016.1166224}, author = {Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {46940, title = {A common evolutionary origin for the ON- and OFF-edge motion detection pathways of the Drosophila visual system.}, journal = {Frontiers in Neural Circuits}, volume = {9}, year = {2015}, month = {2015}, pages = {33}, abstract = {

Synaptic circuits for identified behaviors in the Drosophila brain have typically been considered from either a developmental or functional perspective without reference to how the circuits might have been inherited from ancestral forms. For example, two candidate pathways for ON- and OFF-edge motion detection in the visual system act via circuits that use respectively either T4 or T5, two cell types of the fourth neuropil, or lobula plate (LOP), that exhibit narrow-field direction-selective responses and provide input to wide-field tangential neurons. T4 or T5 both have four subtypes that terminate one each in the four strata of the LOP. Representatives are reported in a wide range of Diptera, and both cell types exhibit various similarities in: (1) the morphology of their dendritic arbors; (2) their four morphological and functional subtypes; (3) their cholinergic profile in Drosophila; (4) their input from the pathways of L3 cells in the first neuropil, or lamina (LA), and by one of a pair of LA cells, L1 (to the T4 pathway) and L2 (to the T5 pathway); and (5) their innervation by a single, wide-field contralateral tangential neuron from the central brain. Progenitors of both also express the gene atonal early in their proliferation from the inner anlage of the developing optic lobe, being alone among many other cell type progeny to do so. Yet T4 receives input in the second neuropil, or medulla (ME), and T5 in the third neuropil or lobula (LO). Here we suggest that these two cell types were originally one, that their ancestral cell population duplicated and split to innervate separate ME and LO neuropils, and that a fiber crossing-the internal chiasma-arose between the two neuropils. The split most plausibly occurred, we suggest, with the formation of the LO as a new neuropil that formed when it separated from its ancestral neuropil to leave the ME, suggesting additionally that ME input neurons to T4 and T5 may also have had a common origin.

}, issn = {1662-5110}, doi = {10.3389/fncir.2015.00033}, author = {Shinomiya, Kazunori and Takemura, Shin-ya and Rivlin, Patricia K and Plaza, Stephen M and Scheffer, Louis K and Meinertzhagen, Ian A} } @article {47152, title = {Synaptic circuits and their variations within different columns in the visual system of Drosophila.}, journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America}, volume = {112}, year = {2015}, month = {2015 Nov 3}, pages = {13711-6}, abstract = {

We reconstructed the synaptic circuits of seven columns in the second neuropil or medulla behind the fly{\textquoteright}s compound eye. These neurons embody some of the most stereotyped circuits in one of the most miniaturized of animal brains. The reconstructions allow us, for the first time to our knowledge, to study variations between circuits in the medulla{\textquoteright}s neighboring columns. This variation in the number of synapses and the types of their synaptic partners has previously been little addressed because methods that visualize multiple circuits have not resolved detailed connections, and existing connectomic studies, which can see such connections, have not so far examined multiple reconstructions of the same circuit. Here, we address the omission by comparing the circuits common to all seven columns to assess variation in their connection strengths and the resultant rates of several different and distinct types of connection error. Error rates reveal that, overall, \<1\% of contacts are not part of a consensus circuit, and we classify those contacts that supplement (E+) or are missing from it (E-). Autapses, in which the same cell is both presynaptic and postsynaptic at the same synapse, are occasionally seen; two cells in particular, Dm9 and Mi1, form >=20-fold more autapses than do other neurons. These results delimit the accuracy of developmental events that establish and normally maintain synaptic circuits with such precision, and thereby address the operation of such circuits. They also establish a precedent for error rates that will be required in the new science of connectomics.

}, issn = {1091-6490}, doi = {10.1073/pnas.1509820112}, author = {Takemura, Shin-ya and Xu, C Shan and Lu, Zhiyuan and Rivlin, Patricia K and Parag, Toufiq and Olbris, Donald J and Plaza, Stephen and Zhao, Ting and Katz, William T and Umayam, Lowell and Weaver, Charlotte and Hess, Harald F and Horne, Jane Anne and Nunez-Iglesias, Juan and Aniceto, Roxanne and Chang, Lei-Ann and Lauchie, Shirley and Nasca, Ashley and Ogundeyi, Omotara and Sigmund, Christopher and Takemura, Satoko and Tran, Julie and Langille, Carlie and Le Lacheur, Kelsey and McLin, Sari and Shinomiya, Aya and Chklovskii, Dmitri B and Meinertzhagen, Ian A and Scheffer, Louis K} }