vHPC-LS neuron inhibition increases investigation of a mouse paired with inhibition
(A) A schematic showing retroAAV-Cre-mCherry injection in the LS and AAV5-Ef1a-DIO eNpHR 3.0-EYFP injection in the vHPC. Optical ferrules were implanted in the vHPC to inhibit NpHR expressing vHPC-LS neurons. (B) Example histology showing vHPC-LS neurons labeled with NpHR (expressing both EYFP and mCherry) and ferrule placement. (C) As with the chemogenetic condition, mice were pair housed for 72 hours with a sex-matched, and age-matched conspecific for familiarization, then are run through the SDT. In the task, mice can freely explore an arena containing two encaged conspecifics, one novel and one familiar. vHPC-LS neurons were inhibited (532 nm; 6 mW; constant light stimulation) in the proximity of one of the two conspecifics. (D) Control mice expressing EGFP had light stimulation paired with either a novel (N-ON) or a familiar conspecific (F-ON). We also had a stimulation-free condition (OFF). Control mice, regardless of stimulation group, preferentially spent more time in the proximity of the novel conspecific relative to the familiar conspecific (Two-factor ANOVA with light condition (on or off) and conspecific identity as factors; interaction: p = 0.898, main effect of conspecific identity: p = 2.8E-05; post hoc Sidak multiple comparison tests; OFF: p = 0.032; N-ON: p = 0.012; F-ON: p = 0.032; EGFP: n = 20 mice). (E) Discrimination scores show that control mice in all light stimulation conditions preferentially spend more time investigating the novel conspecific relative to familiar conspecific (One sample t-test, OFF: p = 0.008, N-ON: p = 0.009, F-ON: p = 0.028; EGFP: n = 20 mice). (F, G) Mice expressing NpHR had light stimulation paired with a novel (N-ON) or familiar conspecific (F-ON), in addition to a stimulation-free condition (OFF). NpHR mice preferentially spent more time in the proximity of the novel conspecific relative to the familiar conspecific, except when stimulation was paired with a familiar conspecific (Two-factor ANOVA with light condition and conspecific identity as factors; interaction: p = 0.024, main effect of conspecific identity p = 0.006, post hoc Sidak multiple comparison tests; OFF: p = 0.006, N-ON: p = 0.037, F-ON: p = 0.949, discrimination score: one sample t-test, OFF: p = 0.002, N-ON: p = 0.19, F-ON: p = 0.719; NpHR: n = 15 mice). (H, I) EGFP mice were then run through the SDT, but with two novel conspecifics to look at the impact of stimulation on novelty preference. Mice were run in either light off (OFF) condition or stimulated when in the proximity of one of two novel animals (N’-ON). Control mice, regardless of stimulation group, spent an equivalent amount of time in the proximity of each novel conspecific (Two-factor ANOVA with light condition and conspecific identity as factors; interaction: p = 0.006, no main effect of conspecific identity: p = 0.608; post hoc Sidak multiple comparison tests; OFF: p = 0.376, N-ON: p = 0.075; discrimination scores: one sample t-test, OFF: p = 0.535, N-ON: p = 0.128; EGFP: n = 20 mice) (J, K) NpHR mice were then run through the novel SDT in the light off or N’-ON condition. NpHR mice exhibited a preference for the novel conspecific paired with vHPC-LS inhibition (Two-factor ANOVA with light condition and conspecific identity as factors, interaction: p = 0.040, main effect of conspecific identity: p = 0.005, post hoc Sidak multiple comparison tests; N-OFF: p = 0.961, N-ON: p = 0.001; discrimination scores: one sample t-test, OFF: p = 0.796, N’-ON: p = 0.029; NpHR: n = 20 mice) (L, M) Control mice, regardless of stimulation group, showed an equal preference for both novel objects (Two-factor ANOVA with light condition and object identity (N or N’) as factors; interaction: p = 0.878, no main effect of object identity: p = 0.220, post hoc Sidak multiple comparison tests; N-OFF: p = 0.704, N-ON: p = 0.556; discrimination score: one sample t-test, OFF: p = 0.697, N-ON: p = 0.422; EGFP: n = 14 mice) (N, O) vHPC-LS inhibition had no effect on object preference even when one of the two novel objects were paired with stimulation. (Two-factor ANOVA with light condition and object identity as factors; interaction: p = 0.871, no main effect of object identity: p = 0.505, post hoc Sidak multiple comparison tests; N-OFF: p = 0.853, N-ON: p = 0.968; discrimination score: one sample t-test, OFF: p = 0.720, N-ON: p = 0.905; NpHR: n = 11 mice) (P, R) We observed that, regardless of light condition, control (P) and NpHR (R) mice spent similar amounts of time in the center of the open field arena (one-way ANOVA, EGFP: p = 0.094, 20 mice; NpHR: p = 0.254, 15 mice). (Q, S) We observed that light conditions had no effect on the speed (pix/sec) of control (Q) and NpHR (S) mice (One-way ANOVA, EGFP: p = 0.259, 20 mice; NpHR: p = 0.775, 15 mice). Green bars denote light ON condition and gray bars denote light OFF condition.