Direct comparison reveals algorithmic similarities in fly and mouse visual motion detection

• Published in: iScience 2023-10, Vol.26 (10), p.107928-107928, Article 107928
• Main Authors: Chen, Juyue, Gish, Caitlin M., Fransen, James W., Salazar-Gatzimas, Emilio, Clark, Damon A., Borghuis, Bart G.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biological sciences; Evolutionary biology; Sensory neuroscience; Zoology
• ISSN: 2589-0042; 2589-0042
• DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.107928

Evolution has equipped vertebrates and invertebrates with neural circuits that selectively encode visual motion. While similarities in the computations performed by these circuits in mouse and fruit fly have been noted, direct experimental comparisons have been lacking. Because molecular mechanisms and neuronal morphology in the two species are distinct, we directly compared motion encoding in these two species at the algorithmic level, using matched stimuli and focusing on a pair of analogous neurons, the mouse ON starburst amacrine cell (ON SAC) and Drosophila T4 neurons. We find that the cells share similar spatiotemporal receptive field structures, sensitivity to spatiotemporal correlations, and tuning to sinusoidal drifting gratings, but differ in their responses to apparent motion stimuli. Both neuron types showed a response to summed sinusoids that deviates from models for motion processing in these cells, underscoring the similarities in their processing and identifying response features that remain to be explained. [Display omitted] •Calcium imaging compares motion processing in mouse and fly•Comparison finds strong similarities in responses to noise and correlations•Sinusoids elicit broad tuning in mice, with optima similar to flies•Apparent motion stimuli elicit distinct response patterns in mice and flies Biological sciences; Zoology; Sensory neuroscience; Evolutionary biology