Locomotion: The rhythm is going to get you
Walking, running and other rhythmic movements require muscles in the legs, arms and back to contract at the right time and in the correct sequence. The muscles involved are activated by motor neurons, which in turn are controlled by neurons within the spinal cord. These spinal neurons are organized into distinct populations, and understanding how these neurons function has been a central question in the field of motor control for many years. Interestingly, the organization and genetic make-up of these neurons are conserved across vertebrates (Goulding, 2009; Sengupta and Bagnall, 2023), making it possible to apply knowledge across species.
Rhythmic movements can be defined in terms of two basic features: speed (fast rhythms or slow rhythms), and pattern (that is, the type and sequence of muscles activated). For example, running involves fast rhythms and a certain pattern of powerful muscle activation, while walking involves slow rhythms and a different pattern of mild muscle activation. It has been shown that motor neurons, and the muscle fibers they contact, are divided into distinct subgroups that have unique cellular properties that complement either slow and mild or fast and powerful movements (Figure 1 left; Purves et al., 2001; McLean and Dougherty, 2015). However, it is unclear if spinal neurons also form such subgroups. Moreover, the mechanisms by which spinal neurons create and maintain slow and fast rhythms and different patterns are not fully understood.
In 2019, two researchers at Northwestern University – Evdokia Menelaou and David McLean – discovered that spinal neurons called V2a neurons formed two distinct subpopulations: bifurcating V2a neurons (which have branched axons) influenced the pattern of muscle activation, while descending V2a neurons (which have a single axon) regulated the speed of the rhythm (Menelaou and McLean, 2019). Now, in eLife, Moneeza Agha, Sandeep Kishore and McLean report the results of experiments on zebrafish larvae that provide new insights into how V2a neurons implement slow or fast movements (Agha et al., 2024).
Previous studies in invertebrates have shown that the intrinsic activity of a neuron can be crucial for creating specific rhythms or patterns of movement (Marder and Bucher, 2001). Agha et al. studied zebrafish, a widely used vertebrate model organism, and employed genetic techniques to target V2a neurons specifically. Moreover, zebrafish larvae do not have a skull or any vertebrae, which makes it possible to record electrical signals directly from V2a neurons – a task that is extremely difficult to do in mice.
They found that descending V2a neurons come in two types: the first type displays continuous activity and is capable of generating fast rhythms; the second type displays bursts of activity, and maintains a slow but steady rhythm. Bifurcating V2a neurons also come in two types. Again, the first type generates fast rhythms, and the second generates bursts of slow rhythms.
Agha et al. then recorded the electrical activity of the V2a neurons as the zebrafish swam at different speeds, finding a remarkable relationship between the speed of movement and the activity of the different types of V2a neurons. For both descending and bifurcating V2a neurons, only the first type (the fast type) were active during the fast swims, while only the second type (the slow type) were active during the slow swims (Figure 1 right).
Next, Agha et al. explored how other neurons connected to the V2a neurons could affect their activity and ability to support different swim speeds by activating (exciting) or suppressing (inhibiting) the V2a neurons. For descending V2a neurons, the researchers found that both fast and slow types were contacted by excitatory and inhibitory partners. Unexpectedly, however, neurons of the first type (the fast type) were primarily inhibited by neurons that were located on the other side of the body (crossed inhibition), which helps them to maintain a fast rhythm, whereas neurons of the second type (slow) were inhibited by neurons on the same side of the body, which is preferable for maintaining a steady, slow rhythm (Figure 1 right).
In bifurcating V2a neurons, the opposite occurs: the fast type are inhibited by neurons on the same side of the body, while the slow type are inhibited by neurons on the opposite side. Moreover, there was more variability in the timing of the inhibitory/excitatory signals sent to the bifurcating V2a neurons, which is consistent with them being mostly involved in influencing the pattern of muscle activation, rather than controlling the speed of the rhythm (Figure 1 right).
Finally, Agha et al. studied zebrafish that had been genetically modified to remove an important source of crossed inhibition. As expected, this modification primarily impacted fast swims, proving that fast and slow movements do indeed require distinct types of V2a neurons (i.e., fast types and slow types) and their specific connecting partners.
These findings advance our knowledge in two key ways. First, they show that speed-specific groups of cells extend from the periphery (muscles) all the way into the central nervous system (spinal V2a neurons). Second, they provide a mechanistic understanding of how neurons combine their intrinsic activity and connections to execute different needs. So, you can walk or run, but you cannot hide, the spinal rhythms will get you.
References
-
Circuits controlling vertebrate locomotion: moving in a new directionNature Reviews Neuroscience 10:507–518.https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2608
-
Central pattern generators and the control of rhythmic movementsCurrent Biology 11:R986–R996.https://doi.org/10.1016/s0960-9822(01)00581-4
-
Peeling back the layers of locomotor control in the spinal cordCurrent Opinion in Neurobiology 33:63–70.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2015.03.001
-
Spinal interneurons: Diversity and connectivity in motor controlAnnual Review of Neuroscience 46:79–99.https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-083122-025325
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2024, Sengupta
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 399
- views
-
- 35
- downloads
-
- 0
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
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)
Further reading
-
- Neuroscience
Dendritic branching and synaptic organization shape single-neuron and network computations. How they emerge simultaneously during brain development as neurons become integrated into functional networks is still not mechanistically understood. Here, we propose a mechanistic model in which dendrite growth and the organization of synapses arise from the interaction of activity-independent cues from potential synaptic partners and local activity-dependent synaptic plasticity. Consistent with experiments, three phases of dendritic growth – overshoot, pruning, and stabilization – emerge naturally in the model. The model generates stellate-like dendritic morphologies that capture several morphological features of biological neurons under normal and perturbed learning rules, reflecting biological variability. Model-generated dendrites have approximately optimal wiring length consistent with experimental measurements. In addition to establishing dendritic morphologies, activity-dependent plasticity rules organize synapses into spatial clusters according to the correlated activity they experience. We demonstrate that a trade-off between activity-dependent and -independent factors influences dendritic growth and synaptic location throughout development, suggesting that early developmental variability can affect mature morphology and synaptic function. Therefore, a single mechanistic model can capture dendritic growth and account for the synaptic organization of correlated inputs during development. Our work suggests concrete mechanistic components underlying the emergence of dendritic morphologies and synaptic formation and removal in function and dysfunction, and provides experimentally testable predictions for the role of individual components.
-
- Neuroscience
The axon initial segment (AIS) constitutes not only the site of action potential initiation, but also a hub for activity-dependent modulation of output generation. Recent studies shedding light on AIS function used predominantly post-hoc approaches since no robust murine in vivo live reporters exist. Here, we introduce a reporter line in which the AIS is intrinsically labeled by an ankyrin-G-GFP fusion protein activated by Cre recombinase, tagging the native Ank3 gene. Using confocal, superresolution, and two-photon microscopy as well as whole-cell patch-clamp recordings in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo, we confirm that the subcellular scaffold of the AIS and electrophysiological parameters of labeled cells remain unchanged. We further uncover rapid AIS remodeling following increased network activity in this model system, as well as highly reproducible in vivo labeling of AIS over weeks. This novel reporter line allows longitudinal studies of AIS modulation and plasticity in vivo in real-time and thus provides a unique approach to study subcellular plasticity in a broad range of applications.