Rats rely on airflow cues for self-motion perception

Lior Polat, Tamar Harpaz, Adam Zaidel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Self-motion perception is a vital skill for all species. It is an inherently multisensory process that combines inertial (body-based) and relative (with respect to the environment) motion cues. Although extensively studied in human and non-human primates, there is currently no paradigm to test self-motion perception in rodents using both inertial and relative self-motion cues. We developed a novel rodent motion simulator using two synchronized robotic arms to generate inertial, relative, or combined (inertial and relative) cues of self-motion. Eight rats were trained to perform a task of heading discrimination, similar to the popular primate paradigm. Strikingly, the rats relied heavily on airflow for relative self-motion perception, with little contribution from the (limited) optic flow cues provided—performance in the dark was almost as good. Relative self-motion (airflow) was perceived with greater reliability vs. inertial. Disrupting airflow, using a fan or windshield, damaged relative, but not inertial, self-motion perception. However, whiskers were not needed for this function. Lastly, the rats integrated relative and inertial self-motion cues in a reliability-based (Bayesian-like) manner. These results implicate airflow as an important cue for self-motion perception in rats and provide a new domain to investigate the neural bases of self-motion perception and multisensory processing in awake behaving rodents.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)4248-4260.e5
JournalCurrent Biology
Volume34
Issue number18
DOIs
StatePublished - 23 Sep 2024

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Elsevier Inc.

Keywords

  • Bayesian
  • anemosensing
  • anemotaxis
  • multisensory
  • optic flow
  • somatosensory
  • vestibular

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Rats rely on airflow cues for self-motion perception'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this