IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v15y2024i1d10.1038_s41467-024-47366-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Distinct information conveyed to the olfactory bulb by feedforward input from the nose and feedback from the cortex

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph D. Zak

    (University of Illinois Chicago
    University of Illinois Chicago)

  • Gautam Reddy

    (Inc.
    Princeton University
    Harvard University)

  • Vaibhav Konanur

    (University of Illinois Chicago)

  • Venkatesh N. Murthy

    (Harvard University
    Harvard University
    Harvard University)

Abstract

Sensory systems are organized hierarchically, but feedback projections frequently disrupt this order. In the olfactory bulb (OB), cortical feedback projections numerically match sensory inputs. To unravel information carried by these two streams, we imaged the activity of olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs) and cortical axons in the mouse OB using calcium indicators, multiphoton microscopy, and diverse olfactory stimuli. Here, we show that odorant mixtures of increasing complexity evoke progressively denser OSN activity, yet cortical feedback activity is of similar sparsity for all stimuli. Also, representations of complex mixtures are similar in OSNs but are decorrelated in cortical axons. While OSN responses to increasing odorant concentrations exhibit a sigmoidal relationship, cortical axonal responses are complex and nonmonotonic, which can be explained by a model with activity-dependent feedback inhibition in the cortex. Our study indicates that early-stage olfactory circuits have access to local feedforward signals and global, efficiently formatted information about odor scenes through cortical feedback.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph D. Zak & Gautam Reddy & Vaibhav Konanur & Venkatesh N. Murthy, 2024. "Distinct information conveyed to the olfactory bulb by feedforward input from the nose and feedback from the cortex," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:15:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-024-47366-6
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-47366-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-47366-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-024-47366-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dara L. Sosulski & Maria Lissitsyna Bloom & Tyler Cutforth & Richard Axel & Sandeep Robert Datta, 2011. "Distinct representations of olfactory information in different cortical centres," Nature, Nature, vol. 472(7342), pages 213-216, April.
    2. Joseph D. Zak & Gautam Reddy & Massimo Vergassola & Venkatesh N. Murthy, 2020. "Antagonistic odor interactions in olfactory sensory neurons are widespread in freely breathing mice," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Cindy Poo & Gautam Agarwal & Niccolò Bonacchi & Zachary F. Mainen, 2022. "Spatial maps in piriform cortex during olfactory navigation," Nature, Nature, vol. 601(7894), pages 595-599, January.
    4. Assunta Diodato & Marion Ruinart de Brimont & Yeong Shin Yim & Nicolas Derian & Sandrine Perrin & Juliette Pouch & David Klatzmann & Sonia Garel & Gloria B Choi & Alexander Fleischmann, 2016. "Molecular signatures of neural connectivity in the olfactory cortex," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, November.
    5. Evan C. Smith & Michael S. Lewicki, 2006. "Efficient auditory coding," Nature, Nature, vol. 439(7079), pages 978-982, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Noga Mosheiff & Haggai Agmon & Avraham Moriel & Yoram Burak, 2017. "An efficient coding theory for a dynamic trajectory predicts non-uniform allocation of entorhinal grid cells to modules," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Sam V Norman-Haignere & Josh H McDermott, 2018. "Neural responses to natural and model-matched stimuli reveal distinct computations in primary and nonprimary auditory cortex," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-46, December.
    3. Jonathan J Hunt & Peter Dayan & Geoffrey J Goodhill, 2013. "Sparse Coding Can Predict Primary Visual Cortex Receptive Field Changes Induced by Abnormal Visual Input," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Jacob N Oppenheim & Pavel Isakov & Marcelo O Magnasco, 2013. "Degraded Time-Frequency Acuity to Time-Reversed Notes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(6), pages 1-6, June.
    5. Lubomir Kostal & Petr Lansky & Jean-Pierre Rospars, 2008. "Efficient Olfactory Coding in the Pheromone Receptor Neuron of a Moth," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(4), pages 1-11, April.
    6. Gaia Tavoni & David E Chen Kersen & Vijay Balasubramanian, 2021. "Cortical feedback and gating in odor discrimination and generalization," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-35, October.
    7. Camille Mazo & Antoine Nissant & Soham Saha & Enzo Peroni & Pierre-Marie Lledo & Gabriel Lepousez, 2022. "Long-range GABAergic projections contribute to cortical feedback control of sensory processing," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Geoffrey Terral & Evan Harrell & Gabriel Lepousez & Yohan Wards & Dinghuang Huang & Tiphaine Dolique & Giulio Casali & Antoine Nissant & Pierre-Marie Lledo & Guillaume Ferreira & Giovanni Marsicano & , 2024. "Endogenous cannabinoids in the piriform cortex tune olfactory perception," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    9. Jonathan Schaffner & Sherry Dongqi Bao & Philippe N. Tobler & Todd A. Hare & Rafael Polania, 2023. "Sensory perception relies on fitness-maximizing codes," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(7), pages 1135-1151, July.
    10. Gonzalo H Otazu & Christian Leibold, 2011. "A Corticothalamic Circuit Model for Sound Identification in Complex Scenes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-15, September.
    11. Lingyun Zhao & Li Zhaoping, 2011. "Understanding Auditory Spectro-Temporal Receptive Fields and Their Changes with Input Statistics by Efficient Coding Principles," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(8), pages 1-16, August.
    12. Tomas Barta & Lubomir Kostal, 2019. "The effect of inhibition on rate code efficiency indicators," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-21, December.
    13. Philippe Albouy & Samuel A. Mehr & Roxane S. Hoyer & Jérémie Ginzburg & Yi Du & Robert J. Zatorre, 2024. "Spectro-temporal acoustical markers differentiate speech from song across cultures," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    14. Oded Barzelay & Miriam Furst & Omri Barak, 2017. "A New Approach to Model Pitch Perception Using Sparse Coding," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-36, January.
    15. Samuel K. H. Sy & Danny C. W. Chan & Roy C. H. Chan & Jing Lyu & Zhongqi Li & Kenneth K. Y. Wong & Chung Hang Jonathan Choi & Vincent C. T. Mok & Hei-Ming Lai & Owen Randlett & Yu Hu & Ho Ko, 2023. "An optofluidic platform for interrogating chemosensory behavior and brainwide neural representation in larval zebrafish," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:15:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-024-47366-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.