Search

The cut optic nerve of a goldfish can regenerate, restoring an orderly projection from the retina to the optic tectum. At first, regenerating axons make transient connections, many of them in inappropriate tectal locations. Later, their arrangement is gradually refined into an accurate retinotectal map by a process that depends on afferent activity. On their way to the tectum, many regenerating axons make erroneous choices between the two arms (brachia) of the optic tract. However, since they commonly possess divergent collateral branches, a secondary refinement of the brachial pattern can occur by selective collateral elimination. How or why a particular collateral is lost is not known, but we have previously suggested that sibling branches might compete to form stable tectal synapses, implying that there might be a causal link between refinement of the brachial pattern and refinement of the retinotectal map. In this paper, we have tested directly for such a link, blocking map refinement with tetrodotoxin (TTX) or stroboscopic light, verifying the effectiveness of the block and measuring the extent of brachial refinement by standard methods in experimental and control fish. Both TTX and stroboscopic light reliably prevented map refinement, their results being indistinguishable. However, neither had even the slightest detrimental effect on brachial refinement, either 42 days or 70 days after nerve cut. Evidently, neither activity nor a sharp retinotectal projection is necessary for brachial refinement. Theory and experiment both dictate that the basic projection pattern be controlled by a mechanism (such as chemoaffinity) that is independent of activity, and it would seem that selective collateral loss must depend on the same mechanism.

In the normal goldfish, optic axons are distributed between the two arms (brachia) of each optic tract, in such a way that each axon enters the tectum close to its retinotopic termination site. We have shown previously that regenerating axons at first express little or no preference for their normal brachium. Later, however, a partial refinement of the brachial pathway takes place, implying that some axons must have sent out divergent collateral branches and then eliminated the least appropriate. We have now studied the formation and subsequent loss of axon collaterals in regeneration using retro–gradely transported fluorescent dyes. We labelled the axons in the medial brachium with Fast Blue and those in the lateral brachium with Diamidino Yellow in a way that avoided cross–contamination. In normal fish, yellow–labelled ganglion cells dominated the dorsal retina and blue–labelled ganglion cells the ventral, with only a narrow zone of overlap. Double–labelled cells were not found. In fish labelled early in regeneration, however, both dyes were spread over the entire retina in single– and double–labelled ganglion cells. As regeneration progressed, each dye again came to dominate its appropriate retinal region; but much less strongly, confirming previous results. At the same time, doublelabelled cells became harder to find. From 60 days after nerve cut onwards they were rare, and largely confined to the boundary zone between dorsal and ventral retina. Their distribution was consistent with our previous proposal that excess collaterals may be eliminated competitively. Since axons from the boundary zone terminate in a tectal strip equidistant from the two brachia, neither route would confer any clear competitive advantage over the other.

The optic tract of the goldfish splits into two brachia just before it reaches the tectum, normal optic axons being distributed systematically between the two according to their retinal origins. The orderliness of this division, like that of the retinotectal projection itself, is conventionally attributed to a system of specific axonal guidance cues. However, the brachial distribution of regenerated axons is much less orderly; and, since there is evidence that these axons have many collateral branches in the nerve and tract, the gross order that remains after regeneration could potentially arise secondarily, in parallel with refinement of the retinotectal map, by a preferential loss of collaterals from the inappropriate brachium. The brachial paths of normal axons, and axons regenerated after optic nerve cut for periods ranging from 19 days to 5 years, were therefore studied by anterograde labelling with horseradish peroxidase from discrete retinal lesions or retrograde labelling of ganglion cells from a cut brachium. From 19 to 28 days, regenerating axons showed little or no preference for their normal brachium. During this period (which includes the first week of tectal synaptogenesis) an average of 46·3 % of cells retrogradely labelled from a cut medial brachium were in dorsal retina, compared with only 1· 45% in normal fish. Some preference for the normal brachium was evident at 35 days and significant order had returned by 42–70 days, when the average proportion of labelled cells in dorsal retina had fallen to 25·4 % though the average number in the whole retina was unchanged. Thus a brachial refinement had occurred in parallel with refinement of the retinotectal map. These results support the idea of a selective loss of axon collaterals from the inappropriate brachium, though they do not exclude the possibility of some concurrent gain in the appropriate one. We suggest that refinement may depend on a process we term ‘sibling rivalry’: competition between different collaterals of the same axon to form a critical number of stable tectal synapses, in which the most-normally-routed branches have the best chance of succeeding and surviving. Developing normal axons might also make use of collateral formation and ‘sibling rivalry’ to generate and refine the complex interwoven patterns of the normal optic tract.