Toward standardized guidelines for investigating neural circuit control of behavior in animal research

Abstract

With the advent of tools for recording and manipulating activity with high spatiotemporal resolution in defined neural circuits in behaving animals, behavioral neuroscience is now tasked with establishing field-wide standards for implementing and interpreting these powerful approaches. Theoretical frameworks for what constitute proof of fundamental neurobiological principles is an ongoing and frequently debated topic. On the other hand, standardizing interpretation of individual experimental findings to avoid spurious conclusions in practice has received less attention. Even within subfields, similar assays are often used to support widely disparate conclusions which in part has contributed to a slew of studies claiming highly specified functions for cell-types and circuits which are often in direct disagreement with one another. In this opinion piece, we discuss common pitfalls in design and interpretation of approaches for recording or manipulating neural activity in animal models of motivated behavior. We emphasize the importance of integrating findings across multiple behavioral assays concomitant with tempered inference regarding specialized neuronal functions as a standardized starting point for parsing circuit control of behavior. Our aim is to stimulate an open and accessible discourse in the literature to address issues of continuity across behavioral neurosciences.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

New technologies in neuroscience allow for increasingly precise recording and stimulation of neural circuits in animal research. The goal is to understand the function of the brain, as well as to develop new ways to treat brain diseases. Yet despite seemingly boundless technical potential, a key limitation for meaningful advances stems from spurious interpretation of experiments. Here we provide specific examples from our own studies and discuss why appropriate interpretation of results can be challenging. We emphasize that standardizing interpretation of behavioral assays, as well as transferring incentives for identifying “specific” circuits to more objectively understanding a circuit’s role across varied behavioral domains, will facilitate assimilation across literatures and ultimately move behavioral neuroscience closer to its goals.