↓ Skip to main content

Closed-Loop Behavioral Control Increases Coherence in the Fly Brain

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroscience, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
10 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Closed-Loop Behavioral Control Increases Coherence in the Fly Brain
Published in
Journal of Neuroscience, July 2015
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.0691-15.2015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angelique C. Paulk, Leonie Kirszenblat, Yanqiong Zhou, Bruno van Swinderen

Abstract

A crucial function of the brain is to be able to distinguish whether or not changes in the environment are caused by one's own actions. Even the smallest brains appear to be capable of making this distinction, as has been shown by closed-loop behavioral experiments in flies controlling visual stimuli in virtual reality paradigms. We questioned whether activity in the fruit fly brain is different during such closed-loop behavior, compared with passive viewing of a stimulus. To address this question, we used a procedure to record local field potential (LFP) activity across the fly brain while flies were controlling a virtual object through their movement on an air-supported ball. The virtual object was flickered at a precise frequency (7 Hz), creating a frequency tag that allowed us to track brain responses to the object while animals were behaving. Following experiments under closed-loop control, we replayed the same stimulus to the fly in open loop, such that it could no longer control the stimulus. We found identical receptive fields and similar strength of frequency tags across the brain for the virtual object under closed loop and replay. However, when comparing central versus peripheral brain regions, we found that brain responses were differentially modulated depending on whether flies were in control or not. Additionally, coherence of LFP activity in the brain increased when flies were in control, compared with replay, even if motor behavior was similar. This suggests that processes associated with closed-loop control promote temporal coordination in the insect brain. We show that closed-loop control of a visual stimulus promotes temporal coordination across the Drosophila brain, compared with open-loop replay of the same visual sequences. This is significant because it suggests that, to understand goal-directed behavior or visual attention in flies, it may be most informative to sample neural activity from multiple regions across the brain simultaneously, and to examine temporal relationships (e.g., coherence) between these regions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 94 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 29%
Researcher 24 24%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Master 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 19 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 32 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 27%
Psychology 6 6%
Engineering 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 21 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 September 2015.
All research outputs
#659,875
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroscience
#962
of 24,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,318
of 277,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroscience
#15
of 305 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,265 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 305 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.