Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro

eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleFeature: Research Highlights, Cognition and Behavior

Behavioral Responses to Neural Circuit Control: Pitfalls and Possible Solutions

Oscar Solis
eNeuro 8 July 2021, 8 (4) ENEURO.0223-21.2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0223-21.2021
Oscar Solis
National Institute on Drug Abuse Intramural Research Program, Baltimore, MD 21224
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Highlighted Research Paper: Lewis AS, Calipari ES, Siciliano CA (2021) Toward Standardized Guidelines for Investigating Neural Circuit Control of Behavior in Animal Research.

One of the fundamental goals of neuroscience is to gain a better understanding of the brain’s role in behavior (Kandel et al., 2013). In the last two decades, the development of new technologies has significantly advanced our knowledge about how neural circuits generate/regulate behavior. Technologies such as optogenetics and chemogenetics, in combination with pharmacological approaches, lesions, gene mutations, and/or imaging, have helped delineate the involvement of specific neurons or anatomic pathways in different behaviors (Kim et al., 2017; Boehm et al., 2021). This has facilitated the attribution of causal relationships between discrete neuronal circuits and behavior. Nevertheless, despite the associated scientific progress, the application of such technologies in neuroscience is not exempt of difficulties or controversy. Reproducibility (or its lack thereof) is a common problem in behavioral experimentation and therefore of fundamental importance and necessity to identify strategies that promote it.

Lewis et al. (2021) set the focus on this topic and provide a discussion about common pitfalls that can lead to misinterpretation of behavioral outcomes during neuronal manipulations. The authors propose several guidelines that could be adopted to improve rigor, reproducibility, and interpretation of behavioral experimentation. To ensure that the tools are being used correctly, strategies need to be carefully planned and executed depending on the scientific questions that need to be answered.

In behavioral neuroscience, there is a tendency to develop automated tasks (Schaefer and Claridge-Chang, 2012). Automated tests are attractive because they can quantify behavior in an unbiased fashion. However, automated scoring is not free from experimental errors that could lead to errors in the interpretation of the results. For instance, if an automated system registers a behavioral response (e.g., the number of lever presses performed by an animal) after manipulation of a discrete circuit, one could miss the various factors that are involved in generating this response, such as motor behavior, exploratory behavior, arousal, or even sleep induction. To address this, Lewis et al. (2021) propose the use of a webcam for recording behavior during a specific task. By using this approach, multiple researchers can observe the experiment repeatedly, play it in back in slow motion, and for publication purposes, the submission of the footage can be archived in online repositories.

Over the last years, a growing body of research has associated the activity of discrete neurons and circuits with specific behavioral outcomes. However, in certain cases, these interpretations have been based on studying behavior using a single paradigm or procedure. Given the complexity of behavior and the multitude of different factors that can affect animal responses, researchers should consider testing additional paradigms or procedures when designing behavioral experiments to lend further support to the interpretation of their initial data. Another important point emphasized by Lewis et al. (2021) involved the overgeneralization of study conclusions. Here, they specifically highlight the importance of describing the behavior itself, placing key emphasis on what is observed during the experiment, so that the conclusions can be fully supported by the data.

The field of neuroscience has adopted recent technologies with great success and more exciting and sophisticated technologies are on the horizon. However, these tools, and their application to the study of complex behavior, are continuously evolving. For this reason, Lewis et al. (2021) propose the need to standardize behavioral testing to reduce the probability of replication failure. In addition, Lewis et al. (2021) note several considerations for future research, including: observation and visual recording of behavioral assays, reporting data in more precise terms that are separate from speculation, reducing the emphasis on defining specificity, and manipulating circuits across a wide range of procedures. Notably, careful consideration should be given to biological and technical variables that can alter the results and their interpretation. Following such practices will ensure greater reproducibility and generalization in the process of attributing causality between discrete neuronal circuit perturbation and behavior.

Footnotes

  • The author declares no competing financial interests.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided that the original work is properly attributed.

References

  1. ↵
    Boehm MA, Bonaventura J, Gomez JL, Solís O, Stein EA, Bradberry CW, Michaelides M (2021) Translational PET applications for brain circuit mapping with transgenic neuromodulation tools. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 204:173147. doi:10.1016/j.pbb.2021.173147 pmid:33549570
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Kandel ER, Markram H, Matthews PM, Yuste R, Koch C (2013) Neuroscience thinks big (and collaboratively). Nat Rev Neurosci 14:659–664. doi:10.1038/nrn3578 pmid:23958663
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Kim CK, Adhikari A, Deisseroth K (2017) Integration of optogenetics with complementary methodologies in systems neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci 18:222–235. doi:10.1038/nrn.2017.15 pmid:28303019
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Lewis AS, Calipari ES, Siciliano CA (2021) Toward standardized guidelines for investigating neural circuit control of behavior in animal research. eNeuro 8:ENEURO.0498-20.2021. doi:10.1523/ENEURO.0498-20.2021
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    Schaefer AT, Claridge-Chang A (2012) The surveillance state of behavioral automation. Curr Opin Neurobiol 22:170–176. doi:10.1016/j.conb.2011.11.004 pmid:22119142
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed

Synthesis

Reviewing Editor: Christophe Bernard, INSERM & Institut de Neurosciences des Systèmes

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 8 (4)
eNeuro
Vol. 8, Issue 4
July/August 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Behavioral Responses to Neural Circuit Control: Pitfalls and Possible Solutions
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Behavioral Responses to Neural Circuit Control: Pitfalls and Possible Solutions
Oscar Solis
eNeuro 8 July 2021, 8 (4) ENEURO.0223-21.2021; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0223-21.2021

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Behavioral Responses to Neural Circuit Control: Pitfalls and Possible Solutions
Oscar Solis
eNeuro 8 July 2021, 8 (4) ENEURO.0223-21.2021; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0223-21.2021
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Feature: Research Highlights

  • Vascularization in mTOR Mouse Mutants: An Effort Not in Vein
  • Cortical Pyramidal and Parvalbumin Cells Exhibit Distinct Spatiotemporal Extracellular Electric Potentials
  • Understanding Glaucoma One Synapse at a Time
Show more Feature: Research Highlights

Cognition and Behavior

  • Dopamine receptor type 2-expressing medium spiny neurons in the ventral lateral striatum have a non-REM sleep-induce function
  • How sucrose preference is gained and lost: An in-depth analysis of drinking behavior during the sucrose preference test in mice
  • Food restriction level and reinforcement schedule differentially influence behavior during acquisition and devaluation procedures in mice
Show more Cognition and Behavior

Subjects

  • Cognition and Behavior

  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2023 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.