Losing the battle but winning the war: game theoretic analysis of the competition between motoneurons innervating a skeletal muscle

The fibers in a skeletal muscle are divided into groups called “muscle units” whereby each muscle unit is innervated by a single neuron. It was found that neurons with low activation thresholds have smaller muscle units than neurons with higher activation thresholds. This results in a fixed recruitment order of muscle units, from smallest to largest, called the “size principle.” It is thought that the size principle results from a competitive process—taking place after birth—between the neurons innervating the muscle. The underlying mechanism of the competition was not understood. Moreover, the results in the majority of experiments that manipulated the activity during the competition period seemed to contradict the size principle. Experiments at the isolated muscle fibers showed that the competition is governed by a Hebbian-like rule, whereby neurons with low activation thresholds have a competitive advantage at any single muscle fiber. Thus neurons with low activation thresholds are expected to have larger muscle units in contradiction to what is seen empirically. This state of affairs was termed “paradoxical.” In the present study we developed a new game theoretic framework to analyze such competitive biological processes. In this game, neurons are the players competing to innervate a maximal number of muscle fibers. We showed that in order to innervate more muscle fibers, it is advantageous to win (as the neurons with higher activation thresholds do) later competitions. This both explains the size principle and resolves the seemingly paradoxical experimental data. Our model establishes that the competition at each muscle fiber may indeed be Hebbian and that the size principle still emerges from these competitions as an overall property of the system. Thus, the less active neurons “lose the battle but win the war.” Our model provides experimentally testable predictions. The new game-theoretic approach may be applied to competitions in other biological systems.

[1]  C. Shatz,et al.  PirB Restricts Ocular-Dominance Plasticity in Visual Cortex , 2006, Science.

[2]  J. Jansen,et al.  Postnatal loss of synaptic terminals in the partially denervated mouse soleus muscle. , 1987, Acta physiologica Scandinavica.

[3]  M. Poo,et al.  Activity-dependent synaptic competition in vitro: heterosynaptic suppression of developing synapses. , 1991, Science.

[4]  S. Cooper Donald O. Hebb's synapse and learning rule: a history and commentary , 2005, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[5]  D. Hubel,et al.  Orientation columns in macaque monkey visual cortex demonstrated by the 2-deoxyglucose autoradiographic technique , 1977, Nature.

[6]  D. Hubel,et al.  Plasticity of ocular dominance columns in monkey striate cortex. , 1977, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[7]  Jeff W. Lichtman,et al.  Long-term synapse loss induced by focal blockade of postsynaptlc receptors , 1994, Nature.

[8]  J. Lichtman,et al.  In Vivo Time-Lapse Imaging of Synaptic Takeover Associated with Naturally Occurring Synapse Elimination , 2003, Neuron.

[9]  A. van Ooyen Competition in the development of nerve connections: a review of models. , 2001, Network.

[10]  M. Buffelli,et al.  The timing of impulse activity shapes the process of synaptic competition at the neuromuscular junction , 2010, Neuroscience.

[11]  P G Nelson,et al.  Proteolytic action of thrombin is required for electrical activity-dependent synapse reduction. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  B. Sakmann,et al.  Cortex Is Driven by Weak but Synchronously Active Thalamocortical Synapses , 2006, Science.

[13]  Li I. Zhang,et al.  Electrical activity and development of neural circuits , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[14]  Edward M. Callaway,et al.  Competition favouring inactive over active motor neurons during synapse elimination , 1987, Nature.

[15]  J M Smith,et al.  Evolution and the theory of games , 1976 .

[16]  T. Wiesel The postnatal development of the visual cortex and the influence of environment. , 1982, Bioscience reports.

[17]  R. Ribchester,et al.  Motor unit size and synaptic competition in rat lumbrical muscles reinnervated by active and inactive motor axons. , 1983, The Journal of physiology.

[18]  D. V. van Essen,et al.  Polyneuronal innervation of skeletal muscle in new‐born rats and its elimination during maturation. , 1976, The Journal of physiology.

[19]  R. Stirling,et al.  The innervation of dorsoventrally reversed chick wings: evidence that motor axons do not actively seek out their appropriate targets. , 1981, Journal of embryology and experimental morphology.

[20]  A L Connold,et al.  Effect of low calcium and protease inhibitors on synapse elimination during postnatal development in the rat soleus muscle. , 1986, Brain research.

[21]  Y. Bailly,et al.  A Model of Developmental Synapse Elimination in the Central Nervous System: Possible Mechanisms and Functional Consequences , 1997 .

[22]  D. Purves,et al.  Elimination of synapses in the developing nervous system. , 1980, Science.

[23]  Herwig Baier,et al.  Regulation of axon growth in vivo by activity-based competition , 2005, Nature.

[24]  Y. Dan,et al.  Hebbian depression of isolated neuromuscular synapses in vitro. , 1992, Science.

[25]  Jeff W. Lichtman,et al.  Activity-Driven Synapse Elimination Leads Paradoxically to Domination by Inactive Neurons , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[26]  C. Shatz,et al.  Synaptic Activity and the Construction of Cortical Circuits , 1996, Science.

[27]  J. Lichtman The reorganization of synaptic connexions in the rat submandibular ganglion during post‐natal development. , 1977, The Journal of physiology.

[28]  Vrbova,et al.  Differentiation of electrical and contractile properties of slow and fast muscle fibres. , 1977, The Journal of physiology.

[29]  J. Mariani,et al.  Synapse Elimination in the Central Nervous System: Functional Significance and Cellular Mechanisms , 1996, Reviews in the neurosciences.

[30]  W. Thompson,et al.  Fibre type composition of single motor units during synapse elimination in neonatal rat soleus muscle , 1984, Nature.

[31]  Walter Senn,et al.  Size principle and information theory , 1997, Biological Cybernetics.

[32]  J. Jansen,et al.  The extent of sprouting of remaining motor units in partly denervated immature and adult rat soleus muscle , 1977, Neuroscience.

[33]  J. Stollberg,et al.  Synapse elimination, the size principle, and Hebbian synapses. , 1995, Journal of neurobiology.

[34]  N. Kasthuri,et al.  Delayed synapse elimination in mouse levator palpebrae superioris muscle , 2011, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[35]  David J. Willshaw,et al.  Competition for neurotrophic factor in the development of nerve connections , 1999, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[36]  Irit Nowik,et al.  The game motoneurons play , 2009, Games Econ. Behav..

[37]  G. Vrbóva,et al.  Matching of muscle properties and motoneurone firing patterns during early stages of development. , 1985, The Journal of experimental biology.

[38]  S. J. Martin,et al.  Synaptic plasticity and memory: an evaluation of the hypothesis. , 2000, Annual review of neuroscience.

[39]  R. Johnstone,et al.  Animal signals , 2013, Current Biology.

[40]  Dianne Rees BEd GradDipPhys Mcsp Nerve- Muscle Interaction , 1995 .

[41]  Roger B. Myerson,et al.  Game theory - Analysis of Conflict , 1991 .

[42]  F. Crépel,et al.  Evidence for a multiple innervation of Purkinje cells by climbing fibers in the immature rat cerebellum. , 1976, Journal of neurobiology.

[43]  J. Lichtman,et al.  Synapse Elimination and Indelible Memory , 2000, Neuron.

[44]  R. Ribchester,et al.  Repression of inactive motor nerve terminals in partially denervated rat muscle after regeneration of active motor axons. , 1984, The Journal of physiology.

[45]  W. Betz,et al.  The effect of selective, chronic stimulation on motor unit size in developing rat muscle , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[46]  Timothy C. Cope,et al.  The Size Principle: Still Working After All These Years , 1995 .

[47]  D. Willshaw The establishment and the subsequent elimination of polyneuronal innervation of developing muscle: theoretical considerations , 1981, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[48]  G. Vrbóva,et al.  The influence of innervation on differentiating tonic and twitch muscle fibres of the chicken , 1981, The Journal of physiology.

[49]  R. O'brien,et al.  Observations on the elimination of polyneuronal innervation in developing mammalian skeletal muscle. , 1978, The Journal of physiology.

[50]  E. Henneman Relation between size of neurons and their susceptibility to discharge. , 1957, Science.

[51]  N. Kasthuri,et al.  The role of neuronal identity in synaptic competition , 2003, Nature.

[52]  G. Vrbóva,et al.  Non‐quantal Release of Acetylcholine Affects Polyneuronal Innervation on Developing Rat Muscle Fibres , 1993, The European journal of neuroscience.

[53]  L. Mendell,et al.  The size principle: a rule describing the recruitment of motoneurons. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[54]  Asuman E. Ozdaglar,et al.  Separable and low-rank continuous games , 2006, Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[55]  E. Callaway,et al.  Differential loss of neuromuscular connections according to activity level and spinal position of neonatal rabbit soleus motor neurons , 1989, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[56]  O. Oscarsson Functional units of the cerebellum - sagittal zones and microzones , 1979, Trends in Neurosciences.