Elsevier

Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Volume 25, April 2014, Pages 201-210
Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Toward large-scale connectome reconstructions

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2014.01.019Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Connectomics provides insights into small stereotypical invertebrate nervous systems.

  • Applying connectomics to nonstereotypical nervous systems requires the following:

  • Imaging with good z-resolution and better segmentation algorithms.

  • Tools for automatic detection, validation, and measurement of synapses.

  • Uncertainty management, incremental reconstruction, and connectome analysis tools.

Recent results have shown the possibility of both reconstructing connectomes of small but biologically interesting circuits and extracting from these connectomes insights into their function. However, these reconstructions were heroic proof-of-concept experiments, requiring person-months of effort per neuron reconstructed, and will not scale to larger circuits, much less the brains of entire animals. In this paper we examine what will be required to generate and use substantially larger connectomes, finding five areas that need increased attention: firstly, imaging better suited to automatic reconstruction, with excellent z-resolution; secondly, automatic detection, validation, and measurement of synapses; thirdly, reconstruction methods that keep and use uncertainty metrics for every object, from initial images, through segmentation, reconstruction, and connectome queries; fourthly, processes that are fully incremental, so that the connectome may be used before it is fully complete; and finally, better tools for analysis of connectomes, once they are obtained.

Introduction

A resurgence of interest in high-throughput, high-resolution quantitative neuroanatomy, known as connectomics, has been accompanied by a passionate debate [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. The proponents of this approach believe that knowing all synaptic connections in the brain will lead to understanding in ways that any lesser detail cannot. The opponents of this approach argue that it is largely a distraction which will not lead to advances in our understanding of brain function. Until recently, the debate about the role of connectomes in neuroscience has been largely theoretical as very few connectomes of biologically interesting circuits have been actually reconstructed.

In the last couple of years, new ‘experimental data points’ have been obtained and can provide experimental grounding to the debate. Thanks to pivotal technological advances, several connectomes of biologically interesting circuits have been reconstructed. The prime example is the connectome module of the fruit fly medulla [6••], which allowed identification of the neurons and the circuit motif involved in motion detection thus setting the stage for finally answering the sixty year old question about the biological implementation of the elementary motion detector (EMD). Others are the connectome of Caenorhabditis elegans male [7], and the reconstruction of the mouse retina [8••].

In this review, we first revisit the connectomics debate in the light of new experimental data and demonstrate that stereotypical connectomes can indeed provide insight into neural computation when used in combination with other approaches. We further argue that, in less stereotypical connectomes such as those in the mammalian cortex, connectomics can help identify stereotypical features such as circuit motifs. One such famous but still experimentally unproven circuit motif has been proposed by Hubel and Wiesel (HW) to explain the emergence of orientational selectivity in the visual cortex from orientationally nonselective thalamic inputs. As the relevant cortical neurons span the volume larger than has been reconstructed before, we next discuss technological developments necessary to obtain this ‘experimental data point’.

Section snippets

What are connectomes good for?

One obvious use of connectomes is as brain atlases: to identify neuronal pathways, individual neurons, and their upstream and downstream synaptic partners. Such information helps focus investigations using other approaches on relevant targets. The C. elegans connectome has been irreplaceable in guiding the work in the field. For example, the knowledge of connections allowed reverse engineering the circuit for forward and backward movement in the worm by ablation of identified neurons [9]. Of

Dataset acquisition and reconstruction flow

In this survey, we will examine current approaches of reconstructing the connectome and the barriers to use them on a large scale, such as the scale required to test the HW circuit motif.

Because of the nanometer-level precision required to exhaustively map neural connections, we restrict our discussion to connectomes reconstructed from high-resolution EM datasets. The EM reconstruction flow shown at a high level in Figure 3 provides the outline for further discussion in this paper. The first

Shape reconstruction: skeletonization and volumetric

One of the main tasks of reconstruction is extracting the neuron shape from the images. This process can be manual or computer assisted, and can be based either on skeletons or a volumetric representation, Figure 4. In skeletonization, the user manually determines 3D line segments that pass through each branch of the neuron. In volumetric reconstruction, each neuron is defined by all of its voxels, which can be assigned through manual contouring techniques [30] or by starting with an initial

Synapse identification and characterization

A connectome, either sparsely or densely traced, requires identifying synaptic connections between neurons. Previous studies [6••, 7•, 10, 39, 40•] manually annotated presynaptic terminals and postsynaptic densities. However, this approach is not practical for larger connectomes because it takes too much time. For example, extrapolation from the experience in [6••] to the full Drosophila brain tells us that without automation this step alone would take hundreds of person years. Advances in

Managing uncertainty

Because reconstruction errors are inevitable, and since the accuracy required depends on the intended use, characterizing types of errors and their rates is a critical part of any reconstruction. Errors arise from many causes including imaging artifacts, image ambiguity, incorrect segmentation, and human mistakes. The primary means of reducing errors involves duplicate judgment of multiple proofreaders/annotators [6••, 8••]. Even so, the true error rates are hard to quantify since the ‘truth’

The logistics of terabyte-scale reconstruction

The logistics required to reconstruct an organism include sample preparation and imaging, distributed data management and versioning, obtaining and maintaining a suite of automated tools for extracting neurons and identifying synapses, procuring sufficient human annotation effort and a team of experts to review ambiguous portions of the reconstruction, implementing quality control mechanisms throughout the process, providing solutions for mining and analyzing connectome results, and software

Conclusions

Scaling up connectomics requires attention to all parts of the flow from data collection to disbursement. The scale, inherent ambiguities, and complexity of the task will require a much more engineered and adaptable solutions than those employed so far.

First, we need better raw data, including image quality, contrast of relevant features, and field of view. These improvements in sample preparation, staining and imaging will be instrumental in reducing ambiguities that are difficult for machines

References and recommended reading

Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as:

  • • of special interest

  • •• of outstanding interest

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the FlyEM team at Janelia Farm Research Campus for providing insights on reconstruction methodology and its many challenges. In particular, we thank Arjun Bharioke, Patricia Rivlin, Toufiq Parag, William Katz, and Donald Olbris for their correspondence. Thanks to Viren Jain for discussion about segmentation strategies. Thanks to Harald Hess, Shan Xu, and Kenneth Hayworth for discussions on advances in imaging. Thanks to Ian Meinertzhagen for discussion on all topics,

References (69)

  • M.C. Hansen et al.

    Unveiling the ISCAS-85 benchmarks: a case study in reverse engineering

    Des Test Comput

    (1999)
  • S. Grillner et al.

    Central pattern generators for locomotion, with special reference to vertebrates

    Annu Rev Neurosci

    (1985)
  • S. Lefort et al.

    The excitatory neuronal network of the C2 barrel column in mouse primary somatosensory cortex

    Neuron

    (2009)
  • W. Denk et al.

    Structural neurobiology: missing link to a mechanistic understanding of neural computation

    Nat Rev Neurosci

    (2012)
  • C.I. Bargmann et al.

    From the connectome to brain function

    Nat Methods

    (2013)
  • J.L. Morgan et al.

    Why not connectomics?

    Nat Methods

    (2013)
  • S. Takemura et al.

    A visual motion detection circuit suggested by Drosophila connectomics

    Nature

    (2013)
  • T.A. Jarrell et al.

    The connectome of a decision-making neural network

    Science

    (2012)
  • M. Helmstaedter et al.

    Connectomic reconstruction of the inner plexiform layer in the mouse retina

    Nature

    (2013)
  • M. Chalfie et al.

    The neural circuit for touch sensitivity in C. elegans

    J Neurosci

    (1985)
  • J.G. White et al.

    The structure of the nervous system of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans

    Philos Trans R Soc Lond B: Biol Sci

    (1986)
  • L.R. Varshney et al.

    Structural properties of the Caenorhabditis elegans neuronal network

    PLoS Comput Biol

    (2011)
  • B. Hassenstein et al.

    Systemtheoretische Analyse der Zeit-, Reihenfolgen- und Vorzeichenauswertung bei der Bewegungsperzeption des Rüsselkäfers Chlorophanus

    Z Naturforschg B

    (1956)
  • A. Borst et al.

    Fly motion vision

    Annu Rev Neurosci

    (2010)
  • M. Joesch et al.

    ON and OFF pathways in Drosophila motion vision

    Nature

    (2010)
  • J. Rister

    Dissection of the peripheral motion channel in the visual system of Drosophila melanogaster

    Neuron

    (2007)
  • A. Stepanyants et al.

    Geometry and structural plasticity of synaptic connectivity

    Neuron

    (2002)
  • D.B. Chklovskii et al.

    Cortical rewiring and information storage

    Nature

    (2004)
  • S. Druckmann et al.

    Neuronal circuits underlying persistent representations despite time varying activity

    Curr Biol

    (2012)
  • D.B. Chklovskii et al.

    Semi-automated reconstruction of neural circuits using electron microscopy

    Curr Opin Neurobiol

    (2010)
  • K.J. Hayworth et al.

    Automating the collection of ultrathin serial sections for large volume TEM reconstructions

    Microsci Microanal

    (2006)
  • G. Knott et al.

    Serial section scanning electron microscopy of adult brain tissue using focused ion beam milling

    J Neurosci

    (2008)
  • A. Veeraraghavan et al.

    Increasing depth resolution of electron microscopy of neural circuits using sparse tomographic reconstruction

  • T. Hu et al.

    Electron microscopy reconstruction of brain structure using sparse representations over learned dictionaries

    IEEE Trans Med Imag

    (2013)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text