Please wait a minute...
Journal of Integrative Neuroscience  2019, Vol. 18 Issue (1): 23-32    DOI: 10.31083/j.jin.2019.01.14
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Intracortical microstimulation parameters modulate flight behavior in pigeon
Kun Zhao1, 2, Hong Wan1, 2, *(), Zhigang Shang1, 2, Xinyu Liu1, 2, 3, Lu Liu1, 2
1 School of Electrical Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450000, China
2 Henan Key Laboratory of Brain Science and Brain-Computer Interface Technology, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450000, China
3 School of Information Engineering, Huanghuai University, Zhumadian, 463000, China
Download:  PDF(10643KB)  ( 652 ) Full text   ( 47 )
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  

Pigeons have a natural affinity for travel by flight. Researchers have recently achieved modulation of pigeon locomotor behaviour by intracortical microstimulation. However, there is a lack of research focused on the analysis of microstimulations parameters in the control of pigeon flight. Here, chronic microelectrode implantation technology is employed to establish a model for evaluation of the effects of pigeon flight modulation. Furthermore, three stimulation parameters are compared (amplitude, frequency, and duty ratio) and analyzed as to how they and their interactions affect the flight of pigeons. Results show that microstimulation of the pigeon formation reticularis medialis mesencephali area has significant effects on modulation of pigeon flight and there is a significant non-linear correlation between the stimulation parameters employed and modulation of the flight trajectory. Additionally, we found that the amplitude interacts with both frequency and duty ratio. These results indicate that the flight trajectory of a pigeon can be modulated by alterations made to microstimulation parameters.

Key words:  Intracortical microstimulation      flight      stimulation parameters      pigeon     
Submitted:  27 January 2019      Accepted:  26 March 2019      Published:  30 March 2019     
Fund: 
  • 61673353/National Natural Science Foundation of China
  • HNBBL17005/Open Foundation of Henan Key Laboratory of Brain Science
*Corresponding Author(s):  Hong Wan     E-mail:  wanhong@zzu.edu.cn

Cite this article: 

Kun Zhao, Hong Wan, Zhigang Shang, Xinyu Liu, Lu Liu. Intracortical microstimulation parameters modulate flight behavior in pigeon. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 2019, 18(1): 23-32.

URL: 

https://jin.imrpress.com/EN/10.31083/j.jin.2019.01.14     OR     https://jin.imrpress.com/EN/Y2019/V18/I1/23

Figure 1.  Behavioural task and experiment procedures. (a) Experimental site. Two 1.2 meter high platforms separated by 15 meters were located at either end of the experimental area. Cameras were placed on the ceiling to collect video of pigeon flight. (b) Schematic of automatic feeding platform. The automatic feeding equipment was installed on the platform to induce pigeon flight. It removed human involvement from the experiment. (c) Diagram showing flight task. Pigeons were trained to reach a platform (A) and get food from a food container. After food was consumed, pigeons flew to the other platform (B) and obtained food again. During the pigeon flight period, stimulation was applied to the FRM area.

Figure 2.  Location of FRM and its organizational structure. (a) Schematic of electrode implantation location in FRM area of a pigeon brain. The location of the FRM area is AP: 3.00 mm, ML: 3.00 mm, DP: 7.5-8.5 mm. (b) Stimulating electrodes, constructed from two twisted-pair electrodes. The electrodes are diameter 100 mm Ni-chrome stainless steel wire, Teflon insulation. The electrodes were implanted in left and right FRM areas simultaneously. (c) Slice schematic of electrode implantation. Left: Dorsal view of the pigeon’s brain. The horizontal dashed line indicates section level AP 3.0. The vertical dashed line indicates section level ML 3.0. Middle: Vertical section of the electrode implantation location. Right: Transverse section of the electrode implantation location.

Figure 3.  Wireless current stimulator and stimulation signal output waveform. (a) Pigeon with the wireless stimulator. The size of the stimulator is 3.3×2.4 cm, and weight 8.5g. (b) Control module and constant-current source stimulation module, next to a ruler as a size reference. The stimulator comprised a wireless communication module, control module, constant-current source stimulation module. (c) Parameters of the constant current biphasic stimulation waveform. "$T$" denoted period and "$t$" denotes the pulse duration as employed here.

Table 1  Parameter test values
Parameter Unit Range Test levels
Amplitude $\mu$A 60-450 T, + 100, + 200
Frequency Hz 100-300 100, 200, 300
Duty Ratio % 20-40 20, 30, 40
Figure 4.  Video signal processing flow chart and effects schematic. Videos recorded flight during the experiment and the transmitted information of the video signals was stored in an Audio Video Interleaved (AVI) format (resolution 1280×720 px). Each image frame was then binarized and the background removed with an inter-frame difference method. The pigeon outline in each frame image was integrated and the graphic centre of gravity of the pigeon was obtained.

Figure 5.  Reaction to electrical stimulation of pigeons either on the ground or in the air. (a) Schematic for pigeon movement on the ground with current stimulation. (b) Movement of pigeon in absence of current stimulation. (c) Movement of pigeon induced by current stimulation. (d) Schematic for pigeon flight trajectories with/without current stimulation. (e) Flight trajectories of pigeon without/with current stimulation in left side FRM. (f) Flight trajectories of pigeon without/with current stimulation in right side FRM.

Figure 6.  Results for pigeons without/with stimulation during flight. (a) Flight trajectories for pigeon No. P080 (left: without stimulation, right: with stimulation). (b) Statistical summary of results for all six pigeons' $d_{\max}$ (mean $\pm$ standard error-SE).

Figure 7.  Regulating pigeon's flight with different stimulation parameters. (a) Flight trajectories of pigeon No. P075 with the same set of parameters applied three times. (b) Statistical summary of six pigeons (mean $d_{\max}$ $\pm$ standard error, SE) with different parameters.

Figure 8.  The effect on $d_{\max}$ (mean $\pm$ SE) of changing a single stimulation parameter. Left: Amplitude. Frequency was set to 100 Hz and the duty ratio set to 20% when the effect of stimulus amplitude was analysed. The amplitude was gradually increased by a step size of 100 microamp. Middle: Frequency. To determine the effect of frequency, amplitude and the duty ratio were held constant at T + 200 microamp and 20%, respectively. The frequency was gradually increased by a step size of 100 Hz. Right: Duty ratio. When the duty ratio was analyzed, amplitude and frequency were held constant at T + 200 microamp and 300 Hz, respectively. The duty ratio was gradually increased by a step size of 10%.

Figure 9.  Effect on $d_{\max}$ (mean $\pm$ SE) of changed stimulation pair parameters. The dmax values of pigeon No. 075. Left: Amplitude-frequency. When interactive effects between an amplitude parameter and a frequency parameter was analysed, the duty ratio was set to 20%. Middle: Amplitude-duty ratio. The frequency is set to 100 Hz when the effect of the amplitude-duty ratio pair was examined. Right: Frequency-duty ratio. The amplitude was set to T + 200 microamp when the effect of the frequency-duty ratio pair was examined.

[1] Cai, L., Dai, Z. D., Wang, W. B. (2015) Modulating motor behaviors by electrical stimulation of specific nuclei in pigeons. Journal of Bionic Engineering 12, 555-564.
doi: 10.1016/S1672-6529(14)60145-1
[2] Devecioglu, I., Güçlü, B. (2017) Psychophysical correspondence between vibrotactile intensity and intracortical microstimulation for tactile neuroprostheses in rats. Journal of Neural Engineering 14, 1-17.
[3] Dickinson, M. H., Farley, C. T., Full, R. J., Koehl, M. A. R., Kram, R., Lehman, S. (2000) How animals move: an integrative view. Science 288, 100-106.
doi: 10.1126/science.288.5463.100 pmid: 10753108
[4] Ferrier, D. (1877) The functions of the brain. Journal of Psychological Medicine and Mental Pathology 3, 167-168.
doi: 10.1001/jama.1887.02391410027013
[5] Fisher, R., Salanova, V., Witt, T., Worth, R., Henry, T., Gross, R., Oommen, K., Osorio, I., Nazzaro, J., Labar, D., Kaplitt, M., Sperling, M., Sandok, E., Neal, J., Handforth, A., Stern, J., DeSalles, A., Chung, S., Shetter, A., Bergen, D., Bakay, R., Henderson, J., French, J., Baltuch, G., Rosenfeld, W., Youkilis, A., Marks, W., Garcia, P., Barbaro, N., Fountain, N., Bazil, C., Goodman, R., McKhann, G., Krishnamurthy, K. B., Papavassiliou, S., Epstein, C., Pollard, J., Tonder, L., Grebin, J., Coffey, J., Graves, N. (2010) Electrical stimulation of the anterior nucleus of thalamus for treatment of refractory epilepsy. Epilepsia 51, 899-908.
doi: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2010.02536.x pmid: 20331461
[6] Goodman, D. C., Simpson, J. T. (1960) Cerebellar stimulation in the unrestrained and unanesthetized alligator. Journal of Comparative Neurology 114, 127-135.
doi: 10.1002/cne.901140203 pmid: 13851058
[7] Goodman, D. C. (1958) Cerebellar stimulation in the unanesthetized bullfrog. Journal of Comparative Neurology 110, 321-335.
doi: 10.1002/cne.901100302 pmid: 13664838
[8] Güntürkün, O., Verhoye, M., Groof, G. D., Linden, V. A. (2013) A 3-dimensional digital atlas of the ascending sensory and the descending motor systems in the pigeon brain. Brain Structure & Function 218, 269-281.
doi: 10.1007/s00429-012-0400-y pmid: 22367250
[9] Karten, H. J., Hodos, W. (1967) A stereotaxic atlas of the brain og the pigeon (columba livia). Baltimore, USA: Johns Hopkins Press.
[10] Kobayashi, N., Yoshida, M., Matsumoto, N., Uematsu, K. (2009) Artificial control of swimming in goldfish by brain stimulation: Confirmation of the midbrain nuclei as the swimming center. Neuroscience Letters 452, 42-46.
[11] Little, S., Pogosyan, A., Neal, S., Zavala, B., Zrinzo, L., Hariz, M., Foltynie, T., Limousin, P., Ashkan, K., FitzGerald, J. Green, A. L., Aziz, T. Z., Brown, P. (2013) Adaptive deep brain stimulation in advanced Parkinson disease. Annals of Neurology 74, 449-457.
[12] Lyketsos, C. G., Targum, S. D., Pendergrass, J. C., Lozano, A. M. (2012) Deep brain stimulation: a novel strategy for treating Alzheimer's disease. Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience 9, 10-17.
pmid: 23346514
[13] Meghan, W., Numa, D., Mohamad, S. (2016) Intracortical microstimulation parameters dictate the amplitude and latency of evoked responses. Brain Stimulation 9, 276-284.
doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2015.10.008
[14] Noga, B. R., Kriellaars, D. J., Jordan, L. M. (1991) The effect of selective brainstem or spinal cord lesions on treadmill locomotion evoked by stimulation of the mesencephalic or pontomedullary locomotor regions. Journal of Neuroscience 11, 1691-1700.
doi: 10.1016/0165-5728(91)90198-G pmid: 2045881
[15] Sato, H., Maharbiz, M. M. (2010) Recent developments in the remote radio control of insect flight. Frontiers in Neuroscience 4, 1-12.
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2010.00199 pmid: 3100638
[16] Schmidt, E. M., Bak, M. J., Hambrecht, F. T., Kufta, C. V., O'Rourke, D. K., Vallabhanath, P. (1996) Feasibility of a visual prosthesis for the blind based on intracortical microstimulation of the visual cortex. Brain 122, 507-522.
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9394(14)72149-X pmid: 8800945
[17] Seki, K., Kudo, N., Kolb, F., Kolb, F., Yamaguchi, T. (1997) Effects of pyramidal tract stimulation on forelimb flexor motoneurons during fictive locomotion in cats. Neuroscience Letters 230, 195-198.
doi: 10.1016/S0304-3940(97)00516-8 pmid: 9272694
[18] Sholomenko, G. N., Funk, G. D., Steeves, J. D. (1991) Locomotor activities in the decerebrate bird without phasic afferent input. Neuroscience 40, 257-266.
doi: 10.1016/0306-4522(91)90188-T pmid: 2052153
[19] Su, X. C., Huai, R. T., Yang, J. Q., Wang, H., Lv, C. Z. (2012) Brain mechanism and methods for robo-animal motor behavior control. Science China-information Sciences 9, 1130-1146. (In Chinese)
[20] Tabot, G. A., Dammann, J. F., Berg, J. A., Tenore, F. V., Boback, J. L., Vogelstein, R. J., Bensmaia, S. J. (2013) Restoring the sense of touch with a prosthetic hand through a brain interface. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 18279-18284.
[21] Talwar, S. K., Xu, S. H., Hawley, E. S., Weiss, S. A., Moxon, K. A., Chapin, J. K. (2002) Behavioural neuroscience: Rat navigation guided by remote control-Free animals can be 'virtually' trained by microstimulating key areas of their brains. Nature 417, 37-38.
[22] Torab, K., Davis, T. S., Warren, D. J., House, P. A., Normann, R. A., Greger, B. (2016) Multiple factors may influence the performance of a visual prosthesis based on intracortical microstimulation: nonhuman primate behavioural experimentation. Brain Stimulation 8, 276-284.
doi: 10.1088/1741-2560/8/3/035001 pmid: 3144033
[23] Uematsu, K., Todo, T. (1997) Identification of the midbrain locomotor nuclei and their descending pathways in the teleost carp, Cyprinus carpio. Brain Research 773, 1-7.
[24] Wang, H., Li, J., Cai, L., Wang, C., Shi, A. (2018) Flight control of robo-pigeon using a neural stimulation algorithm. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience 17, 337-342.
[25] Wang, W. B., Guo, C., Sun, J. R., Dai, Z. D. (2009) Locomotion elicited by electrical stimulation in the midbrain of the lizard Gekko gecko. Intelligent Unmanned Systems 192, 145-153.
[26] Wilcoxon, F. (1945) Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin 6, 80-83.
doi: 10.2307/3001968
[1] Hao Wang, Junjie Li, Lei Cai, Ce Wang, Aiju Shi. Flight control of robo-pigeon using a neural stimulation algorithm[J]. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 2018, 17(4): 337-342.
No Suggested Reading articles found!