Abstract
Network flexibility is important for adaptable behaviors. This includes neuronal switching, where neurons alter their network participation, including changing from single- to dual-network activity. Understanding the implications of neuronal switching requires determining how a switching neuron interacts with each of its networks. Here, we tested 1) whether "home" and second networks, operating via divergent rhythm generation mechanisms, regulate a switching neuron and 2) if a switching neuron, recruited via modulation of intrinsic properties, contributes to rhythm or pattern generation in a new network. Small, well-characterized feeding-related networks (pyloric, ∼1 Hz; gastric mill, ∼0.1 Hz) and identified modulatory inputs make the isolated crab (Cancer borealis) stomatogastric nervous system (STNS) a useful model to study neuronal switching. In particular, the neuropeptide Gly(1)-SIFamide switches the lateral posterior gastric (LPG) neuron (2 copies) from pyloric-only to dual-frequency pyloric/gastric mill (fast/slow) activity via modulation of LPG-intrinsic properties. Using current injections to manipulate neuronal activity, we found that gastric mill, but not pyloric, network neurons regulated the intrinsically generated LPG slow bursting. Conversely, selective elimination of LPG from both networks using photoinactivation revealed that LPG regulated gastric mill neuron-firing frequencies but was not necessary for gastric mill rhythm generation or coordination. However, LPG alone was sufficient to produce a distinct pattern of network coordination. Thus, modulated intrinsic properties underlying dual-network participation may constrain which networks can regulate switching neuron activity. Furthermore, recruitment via intrinsic properties may occur in modulatory states where it is important for the switching neuron to actively contribute to network output.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We used small, well-characterized networks to investigate interactions between rhythmic networks and neurons that switch their network participation. For a neuron switching into dual-network activity, only the second network regulated its activity in that network. In addition, the switching neuron was sufficient but not necessary to coordinate second network neurons and regulated their activity levels. Thus, regulation of switching neurons may be selective, and a switching neuron is not necessarily simply a follower in additional networks.