Nathalie Just1, Lydia Wachsmuth1, Florian Schmid1, and Cornelius Faber1
1Translational Imaging Centre, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
Synopsis
Optogenetics is a more
and more recognized technique for investigating neuronal populations in the rodent
brain. Combined to fMRI (OfMRI), more understanding could be achieved. However,
the effects of powerful light on the tissue remain poorly understood. Here,
experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of blue laser light on the
metabolism of the primary somatosensory cortex.Introduction
Optogenetics allow
spatial and temporal control of the activity of defined neuronal populations in
the living brain. Coupled to Blood Oxygen Level Dependent (BOLD) functional
magnetic resonance magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) this recent modality could
achieve unprecedented understanding of neural circuit function. Nevertheless,
questions remain regarding the maintenance of neurons in their physiological
range when delivering strong laser light to specific regions. Here, experiments
were conducted to investigate the effects of blue laser light on metabolites in
the forelimb region of primary somatosensory cortex (S1FL) in rats using proton
magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS).
Materials and Methods
3 female Fisher rats
(160±10g) underwent a craniotomy 4 mm lateral to the bregma at a depth of 0.1
mm in order to insert an optical fiber into the S1FL, according to the Paxinos
and Watson atlas. Algnate was used to cover the craniotomy during MRI. 2 naive rats served as controls. Surgical procedures were
performed under isoflurane anesthesia (2-2.5% in a mixture of air and oxygen).
During MRI, body temperature and respiration rate
were continuously monitored, using a rectal probe and a pressure sensor. Temperature was maintained at 36°± 1°C using
warm water circulation tubing placed underneath the rat. Stainless steel
electrodes were inserted in the right forepaw for electrical stimulations.
MRI
and 1H-MRS were performed at 9.4T (Biospec 94/20, Bruker GmbH, Ettlingen,
Germany) using a transmit volume coil and a 10mm receive surface coil placed
over the S1FL and the optical fiber implant. Each animal was positioned in a
dedicated cradle equipped with ear and bite bars. Experiments were conducted under
medetomidine sedation (subcutaneous bolus injection of 0.04 mg/kg followed by a
continuous infusion of 0.05mg/kg) 30 minutes after discontinuation of
isoflurane anesthesia. After anatomical
imaging using a 2D RARE sequence and shimming using MAPSHIM, BOLD fMRI was
performed using a single shot gradient echo EPI sequence (TR/TE=1000/22 ms;
BW=300KHz ; 9 slices ; Slice thickness=0.8mm ; FOV=228x26mm2 ;
Matrix=80x80). Electrical stimulation was performed using a repeated 10sOFF-
10sON-10sOFF block paradigm. 5 ms pulses were delivered at 9Hz and 2mA by a
stimulator controlled by an in-house written
LABVIEW program. Blue light was delivered through an optic fiber and controlled
with the same program, using 10ms light pulses above 22mW mm-2 at 9Hz.
PRESS 1H-MRS was conducted using TR/TE=4000/13.55ms. NA=512 ; spectral
width=4960.32Hz and 4096 points with carefully optimized OVS pulses and VAPOR
pulses for water suppression. Spectra
were acquired in a 1.5x1.5x3mm3 volume of interest localized over
the activated S1FL region previously determined with fMRI and encompassing the tip
of the optical fiber. The total acquisition time was 34 minutes including unsuppressed water signal
acquisition in the same VOI. Prior to PRESS acquisitions, first and second
order FASTMAP shimming were performed over the same VOI.
fMRI
series were analyzed using an in-house written ImageJ analysis script,
performing voxel-wise t-test between stimulation and rest periods. Statistical
significance level was set at pvalue<0.01. Average fids acquired with PRESS
were Fourier-transformed, water scaled and fitted with LCmodel using a
simulated basis set.
Results and Discussion
BOLD responses were
observed in S1FL upon electric fore paw
stimulation (Fig.1B) and upon light delivery in S1FL at the fiber
tip, potentially representing heat-induced BOLD effects (Fig.1C). Despite the presence of the optical fiber within the VOI (Fig.1A), we were able to shim down to
a water linewidth of 15±3 Hz,allowing good water suppression and acquisition of
high-quality spectra (SNR=46±3) during both 34 minute- electrical forepaw and
light stimulations. Fig. 2A shows
superimposed labeled spectra acquired without
any stimulation (black) and during electrical forepaw (blue) and blue laser
(red) stimulations in the same rat.
Cramer-Rao lower bounds
were under 35% for all the quantified metabolites. Upon electrical forepaw
stimulation, glucose, glutamate and aspartate concentrations dropped by 25.6,
8.6 and 4.6%, respectively, while glutamine and lactate increased by 7.1 and
22.7%, respectively, in presence of the optical fiber (Fig.2B). In addition, phosphocreatine (PCr) decreased by 22% while
creatine (Cr) increased by 24%. Similar results were obtained in naïve animals
without implanted fiber (Fig.3). These
results were in agreement with previous findings obtained during cortical
stimulation in the rat (1). During blue laser stimulation, most metabolites
(glucose, glutamate, lactate) returned to their resting levels. PCr and Cr further decreased (-52%) and increased
(+43%), respectively relative to resting
levels.
Conclusion
First results indicate
that a superficially implanted optical fiber and low power laser light delivery
in the rat cortex do not disturb 1H-MRS acquisitions. Nonetheless, the S1FL neurochemical profile
measured during light stimulation differed from neurochemical profiles measured
during rest and electrical stimulation, thus requiring further validation.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
Just N, Xin L, Frenkel H et al.Characterization of sustained BOLD activation in the rat barrel cortex and neurochemical consequences. Neuroimage. 2013;74:343-51