EEG-based visual deviance detection in freely behaving mice

The mouse is widely used as an experimental model to study visual processing. To probe how the visual system detects changes in the environment, functional paradigms in freely behaving mice are strongly needed. We developed and validated the first EEG-based method to investigate visual deviance detection in freely behaving mice. Mice with EEG implants were exposed to a visual deviant detection paradigm that involved changes in light intensity as standard and deviant stimuli. By subtracting the standard from the deviant evoked waveform, deviant detection was evident as bi-phasic negativity (starting around 70 ms) in the difference waveform. Additionally, deviance-associated evoked (beta/gamma) and induced (gamma) oscillatory responses were found. We showed that the results were stimulus-independent by applying a "flip-flop" design and the results showed good repeatability in an independent measurement. Together, we put forward a validated, easy-to-use paradigm to measure visual deviance processing in freely behaving mice.

[1]  István Czigler,et al.  ERPs and deviance detection: Visual mismatch negativity to repeated visual stimuli , 2006, Neuroscience Letters.

[2]  E. Brannon,et al.  Developmental trajectory of neural specialization for letter and number visual processing. , 2018, Developmental science.

[3]  Correspondences in the Behavior of the Electroretinogram and of the Potentials Evoked at the Visual Cortex , 1961, The Journal of general physiology.

[4]  N. Kazanina,et al.  Oscillatory characteristics of the visual mismatch negativity: what evoked potentials aren't telling us , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[5]  T. Suzuki,et al.  Visually evoked cortical response in light-adapted cat and liminal brightness discrimination. , 1972, The Japanese journal of physiology.

[6]  Risto Näätänen,et al.  Frequency Change Detection in Human Auditory Cortex , 1999, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[7]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  Analyzing Neural Time Series Data: Theory and Practice , 2014 .

[8]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A dynamic causal model for evoked and induced responses , 2012, NeuroImage.

[9]  Helge B. D. Sørensen,et al.  Pharmaco‐electroencephalographic responses in the rat differ between active and inactive locomotor states , 2019, The European journal of neuroscience.

[10]  Rufin Vogels,et al.  Recent Visual Experience Shapes Visual Processing in Rats through Stimulus-Specific Adaptation and Response Enhancement , 2017, Current Biology.

[11]  Wickliffe C. Abraham,et al.  Rapid visual stimulation induces N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor-dependent sensory long-term potentiation in the rat cortex , 2006, Neuroreport.

[12]  D. Hubel,et al.  Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex , 1968, The Journal of physiology.

[13]  Rafael Yuste,et al.  Somatostatin Interneurons Control a Key Component of Mismatch Negativity in Mouse Visual Cortex. , 2016, Cell reports.

[14]  Naoko Shinozaki,et al.  The effect of deviant stimulus probability on the human mismatch process , 2000, Neuroreport.

[15]  Xiaoying Tang,et al.  Theta Oscillations Related to Orientation Recognition in Unattended Condition: A vMMN Study , 2017, Front. Behav. Neurosci..

[16]  I. Nelken,et al.  Early indices of deviance detection in humans and animal models , 2016, Biological Psychology.

[17]  I. Czigler.  Visual mismatch negativity: Violation of nonattended environmental regularities , 2007 .

[18]  S. Solomon,et al.  Moving Sensory Adaptation beyond Suppressive Effects in Single Neurons , 2014, Current Biology.

[19]  Jordan P. Hamm,et al.  Aberrant Cortical Ensembles and Schizophrenia-like Sensory Phenotypes in Setd1a +/− Mice , 2020, Biological Psychiatry.

[20]  D. Hubel.  Single unit activity in striate cortex of unrestrained cats , 1959, The Journal of physiology.

[21]  J. Rubenstein,et al.  The parvalbumin/somatostatin ratio is increased in Pten mutant mice and by human PTEN ASD alleles. , 2015, Cell reports.

[22]  H. Yao,et al.  Altered visual cortical processing in a mouse model of MECP2 duplication syndrome , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[23]  Jessica A. Cardin,et al.  Optical neural interfaces. , 2014, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[24]  R. Oostenveld,et al.  Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[25]  D. Bates,et al.  Balancing Type I Error and Power in Linear Mixed Models , 2015, 1511.01864.

[26]  C. Pennartz,et al.  Visual Stimulus Detection Correlates with the Consistency of Temporal Sequences within Stereotyped Events of V1 Neuronal Population Activity , 2016, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[27]  M. Kimura.  Visual mismatch negativity and unintentional temporal-context-based prediction in vision. , 2012, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[28]  Gregory McCarthy,et al.  fMRI reveals that involuntary visual deviance processing is resource limited , 2007, NeuroImage.

[29]  K. Campbell,et al.  MMN elicitation during natural sleep to violations of an auditory pattern , 2009, Brain Research.

[30]  Dejan Draschkow,et al.  Cluster-based permutation tests of MEG/EEG data do not establish significance of effect latency or location. , 2019, Psychophysiology.

[31]  E. Amenedo,et al.  MMN in the visual modality: a review , 2003, Biological Psychology.

[32]  I. Czigler,et al.  Visual mismatch negativity is sensitive to illusory brightness changes , 2014, Brain Research.

[33]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Localizing sensory and cognitive systems for pre-attentive visual deviance detection: An sLORETA analysis of the data of Kimura et al. (2009) , 2010, Neuroscience Letters.

[34]  Erich Schröger,et al.  Unintentional temporal context-based prediction of emotional faces: an electrophysiological study. , 2012, Cerebral cortex.

[35]  György Buzsáki,et al.  Layer-Specific Physiological Features and Interlaminar Interactions in the Primary Visual Cortex of the Mouse , 2019, Neuron.

[36]  R. Yuste,et al.  Controlling Visually Guided Behavior by Holographic Recalling of Cortical Ensembles , 2019, Cell.

[37]  L. Lagnado,et al.  Opposing forms of adaptation in mouse visual cortex are controlled by distinct inhibitory microcircuits and gated by locomotion , 2020, bioRxiv.

[38]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  The mismatch negativity: A review of underlying mechanisms , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[39]  Joseph Hilbe,et al.  Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models , 2009 .

[40]  T. Tsumoto,et al.  GABAergic Neurons Are Less Selective to Stimulus Orientation than Excitatory Neurons in Layer II/III of Visual Cortex, as Revealed by In Vivo Functional Ca2+ Imaging in Transgenic Mice , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[41]  Per B. Brockhoff,et al.  lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models , 2017 .

[42]  Charlotte Stagg,et al.  Visual mismatch negativity: the detection of stimulus change , 2004, Neuroreport.

[43]  Renee Hoch,et al.  Gamma Rhythms Link Prefrontal Interneuron Dysfunction with Cognitive Inflexibility in Dlx5/6 +/− Mice , 2015, Neuron.

[44]  Lief E. Fenno,et al.  Neocortical excitation/inhibition balance in information processing and social dysfunction , 2011, Nature.

[45]  Steven G. Luke,et al.  Evaluating significance in linear mixed-effects models in R , 2016, Behavior Research Methods.

[46]  D. Bates,et al.  Parsimonious Mixed Models , 2015, 1506.04967.

[47]  I. Czigler,et al.  Visual mismatch negativity and stimulus-specific adaptation: the role of stimulus complexity , 2019, Experimental Brain Research.

[48]  Robert Oostenveld,et al.  FieldTrip: Open Source Software for Advanced Analysis of MEG, EEG, and Invasive Electrophysiological Data , 2010, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[49]  K. Martin,et al.  Local Circuits for Contrast Normalization and Adaptation Investigated with Two-Photon Imaging in Cat Primary Visual Cortex , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[50]  W. Drinkenburg,et al.  Emergence of early alterations in network oscillations and functional connectivity in a tau seeding mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease pathology , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[51]  D. Salisbury,et al.  Mismatch Negativity (MMN) as an Index of Cognitive Dysfunction , 2014, Brain Topography.

[52]  M. Carandini,et al.  Mouse Visual Cortex Is Modulated by Distance Traveled and by Theta Oscillations , 2020, Current Biology.

[53]  E. Schröger,et al.  Human visual system automatically represents large-scale sequential regularities , 2010, Brain Research.

[54]  J. Meijer,et al.  Irradiance encoding in the suprachiasmatic nuclei by rod and cone photoreceptors , 2013, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[55]  S. Jones.  When brain rhythms aren't ‘rhythmic’: implication for their mechanisms and meaning , 2016, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[56]  W. Sannita,et al.  Modulation of flash stimulation intensity and frequency: effects on visual evoked potentials and oscillatory potentials recorded in awake, freely moving mice , 2002, Behavioural Brain Research.

[57]  M. Sabri,et al.  Effects of sequential and temporal probability of deviant occurrence on mismatch negativity. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[58]  Maria V. Sanchez-Vives,et al.  Cellular Mechanisms of Long-Lasting Adaptation in Visual Cortical Neurons In Vitro , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[59]  M. Baker.  Neuroscience: Through the eyes of a mouse , 2013, Nature.

[60]  M. Carandini,et al.  Subcortical Source and Modulation of the Narrowband Gamma Oscillation in Mouse Visual Cortex , 2016, Neuron.

[61]  H. Yabe,et al.  The Development of Memory Trace Depending on the Number of the Standard Stimuli , 2006, Clinical EEG and neuroscience.

[62]  R. Näätänen,et al.  Criteria for determining whether mismatch responses exist in animal models: Focus on rodents , 2016, Biological Psychology.

[63]  I. Czigler,et al.  Visual mismatch negativity (vMMN) for low- and high-level deviances: A control study , 2017, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[64]  M. Ferrari,et al.  Responsivity to light in familial hemiplegic migraine type 1 mutant mice reveals frequency‐dependent enhancement of visual network excitability , 2020, The European journal of neuroscience.

[65]  F. Bremmer,et al.  Preattentive Processing of Numerical Visual Information , 2017, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[66]  K. Kasai,et al.  Mismatch negativity (MMN) as a tool for translational investigations into early psychosis: A review. , 2019, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.