Cracking the Serotonin Code: How Your Brain Predicts Future Rewards

Post by Rachel Sharp

The takeaway

Serotonin neurons signal a prospective code for value – a prediction of near-future rewards that explains why these neurons respond to both rewards and punishments. This unifying theory reconciles seemingly contradictory previous explanations and provides a framework for understanding serotonin's role in learning and behavior.

What's the science?

Serotonin has puzzled scientists for decades. This chemical messenger in the brain has been linked to everything from mood and sleep to learning and decision-making. Despite this, as well as its crucial role in mental health, scientists have struggled to figure out just how serotonin-producing neurons function and respond to stimuli.

The brain receives most of its serotonin from a cluster of cells deep in the brainstem called the dorsal raphe nucleus. Previous theories suggested that serotonin neurons might signal reward, surprise, salience (how significant something is), or even uncertainty, but none of these theories alone could explain all the observed patterns.

A new study published in Nature by Harkin and colleagues might have finally cracked the code. This study introduces a model for serotonin signalling that unifies these perspectives - a "prospective code for value" - that predicts future rewards while efficiently compressing information. The researchers explain unanswered questions like why serotonin neurons activate in response to both rewards and punishments, and why they respond more strongly to surprising rewards, but show no such preference for surprising punishments.

How did they do it?

The researchers built a mathematical model of serotonin neuron activity based on reinforcement learning principles, where "value" represents an estimate of total future reward. Their key insight was that serotonin neurons don't just encode raw value, but rather they filter this signal through a process called spike-frequency adaptation – where neurons gradually decrease their firing rate in response to sustained stimulation.

This filtering creates what's called a "prospective code" that emphasizes surprising value changes while also compressing slow, expected fluctuations in value. Overall, the proposed model predicts that serotonin neurons will:

  • Show temporary activation when a reward-predicting cue appears

  • Activate at the end of a punishment (when value increases as punishment ends)

  • Respond more strongly to surprising rewards than expected ones

  • Show similar responses to both expected and unexpected punishments

To test their model, the researchers analyzed multiple datasets of serotonin neuron recordings from mice during experiments in which animals learned to associate cues with delayed rewards. Finally, they compared their model to competing theories that base the coding of serotonergic activity solely on reward, surprise, and salience.

What did they find?

The prospective value coding model successfully accounted for previously unexplained aspects of serotonin neuron activity:

Responses to rewards and punishments: The model explains why serotonin neurons increase their firing when either a reward begins or a punishment ends: both represent increases in value.

Context modulation: The model accounts for why baseline serotonin activity is higher in reward-rich environments and lower in punishment-rich environments: the activity reflects the average value of each context.

Surprise preference for rewards but not punishments: The model clarifies why serotonin neurons show stronger activation to unexpected rewards but similar responses to both expected and unexpected punishments: previous theories have been unable to account for this.

Finally, when tested against previous theories using quantitative analysis of real neural data, the prospective code for value outperformed competing models in predicting actual serotonin neuron activity.

What's the impact?

By providing a unified computational framework for serotonin function, this research reconciles competing theories and establishes a clear connection to critical aspects of reinforcement learning.

Understanding serotonin's role as a prospective code for value has implications for both basic neuroscience and clinical applications. Many psychiatric disorders involve disruptions in the serotonin system, including depression, anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. A clearer understanding of serotonin's computational role could lead to more targeted treatments and better explanations of how existing treatments work.

Beyond clinical relevance, this research illuminates a fundamental principle of neural processing: adaptation mechanisms. Rather than simply representing information directly, neurons transform signals in ways that make them more useful to downstream brain regions. This principle of efficient coding likely extends beyond the serotonin system to other modulatory systems throughout the brain, suggesting a common computational strategy across neural circuits.

Access the original scientific publication here.

At What Age Does Memory Formation Come “Online?”

Post by Anastasia Sares

The takeaway

This study shows that the hippocampus, a crucial brain structure involved in forming memories, is active as young as 1 year of age. This may indicate that memory formation is present early on, but the ability to maintain or retrieve memories is slower to develop.

What's the science?

Humans don’t remember what happened in the first three years of their lives. This is referred to as infantile amnesia. Why does infantile amnesia exist? It’s still a mystery. One idea that has been suggested is that the hippocampus, a brain region involved in forming memories, might still be developing during these early years, and it might not be fully functional. On the other hand, studies of infant behavior show that infants can react to familiar objects and situations as early as 3 months of age.

This week in Science, Yates and colleagues used functional MRI to examine infant brain activity during a memory task to understand how infant memory works.

How did they do it?

The authors examined infants’ brain activity using functional MRI while they completed a memory task. The infants ranged from 4 to 25 months in age. Infants, of course, can’t respond in the usual way during an fMRI task, since they are unable to press buttons in response to instructions. Instead, the researchers use a preferential looking task, where an infant is shown two objects while their gaze is tracked to determine which object they are looking at. It is assumed that infants will gaze longer at an image they have recently seen compared to a completely new image (however, if the old image becomes too familiar, they may instead switch to looking at the new image, something the authors avoided in this study).

In this study, infants were familiarized with single images appearing in the center of the screen while inside the MRI. Periodically throughout the experiment, there would be a test trial with two images – an image that the infant had seen before, and an image they hadn’t seen before. The amount of time they spent looking at each image was tracked. If the infant looked at the familiar image more than the new image, this counted as “remembering” the old image. Then, the researchers went back and looked at the brain activity in the hippocampus when the infant had first seen each image, comparing remembered images to non-remembered images. They expected more brain activity in the hippocampus for remembered images.

What did they find?

Activity in the hippocampus (specifically, the posterior portion) was significantly greater for remembered images compared to non-remembered images only for older infants, from around 1 year of age onwards. This shows that even though infantile amnesia occurs for approximately the first three years of life, our ability to encode memories is present within the first year. What, then, accounts for the gap in memory for years two and three? It is important to recognize that remembering something involves more than just the initial commitment to memory. We have to maintain that memory and then retrieve it when needed. The authors suggest that infantile amnesia past age 1 may be related to these maintenance and retrieval components, but more research is needed to understand this fully. 

What's the impact?

This study improves our understanding of the timeline of human memory development, helping us identify the first 12 months as crucial for encoding in the hippocampus. Longitudinal studies focused on this developmental period, and studies investigating other brain areas will help us to further crack the code of infantile amnesia.

Good Night, Sleep Tight, Don’t Let the Neurodegenerative Diseases Bite!

Post by Rebecca Glisson

The takeaway

Sleep is often considered a restorative process that enhances the brain’s defenses and facilitates memory processing. Recent studies also highlight its protective properties against neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease.

What happens in our brains when we sleep?

Proper sleep helps with maintaining memory, stable mood, and disposing of waste from brain activity. As we sleep, the cells in our brains interact with each other to form networks that are required for normal brain function. Memory processing happens during slow-wave sleep, the deepest stage of sleep before we begin to dream. Unfortunately, our slow-wave sleep stage deteriorates every year of adulthood, especially between young and middle-aged adulthood. This may lead to brain deterioration in areas of the brain that coordinate our thoughts and actions, such as the prefrontal cortex. This week in Neuron, Parhizkar and Holtzman highlighted recent research focused on the link between disrupted sleep and neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s disease.

How is Alzheimer’s disease linked to sleep?

Amyloid-b plaques form in a person’s brain before they develop Alzheimer’s disease. These plaques directly disrupt the brain networks involved in the sleep/wake cycle and memory processing during sleep. In studies in both animal models and in patients with Alzheimer’s disease, as these plaques build up, slow-wave sleep gets worse. Also, people with excessive daytime sleepiness were more likely to have plaque buildup in the brain. Studies in mice have found that sleep loss can lead to higher plaque and abnormally phosphorylated tau concentrations in the brain, while more sleep can lower the amount of plaque and pathological tau.

How does sleep protect the brain?

By maintaining good sleep habits, you might have a lower likelihood of developing neurodegenerative diseases. A recent study found that adults that had at least 2 hours less than the normal amount of adult sleep had a greater risk of developing dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Fragmented sleep, with lots of disruptions, may also lead to a higher risk of neurodegenerative diseases. The primary immune cells in the brain that break down and remove waste are called microglia. Studies in animal models have shown that microglia have higher calcium concentrations, used for signaling, during sleep. This suggests that sleep allows calcium to increase in microglia, allowing them to remove waste.

What’s next?

We all spend a large portion of our lives asleep. While it could seem like a waste of time, many processes are happening in the brain during sleep that are required to keep us healthy. Without proper sleep, we become lethargic and unproductive. Long-term poor sleep habits could eventually lead to serious neurological disorders. The more we understand the link between sleep and neurodegenerative diseases, the more likely it is that we might find treatments that could prevent diseases before they develop

References +

Colby-Milley, J., Cavanagh, C., Jego, S., Breitner, J.C.S., Quirion, R., and Adamantidis, A. (2015). Sleep-Wake Cycle Dysfunction in the TgCRND8 Mouse Model of Alzheimer’s Disease: From Early to Advanced Pathological Stages. PLoS One 10, e0130177. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL. PONE.0130177.

Hahn, E.A., Wang, H.-X., Andel, R., and Fratiglioni, L. (2014). A Change in Sleep Pattern May Predict Alzheimer Disease. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 22, 1262–1271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2013.04.015.

Jack, C.R., Knopman, D.S., Jagust, W.J., Shaw, L.M., Aisen, P.S., Weiner, M.W., Petersen, R.C., and Trojanowski, J.Q. (2010). Hypothetical model of dynamic biomarkers of the Alzheimer’s pathological cascade. Lancet Neurol. 9, 119–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(09) 70299-6.

Kang, J.-E., Lim, M.M., Bateman, R.J., Lee, J.J., Smyth, L.P., Cirrito, J.R., Fujiki, N., Nishino, S., and Holtzman, D.M. (2009). Amyloid-b Dynamics Are Regulated by Orexin and the Sleep-Wake Cycle. Science 326, 1005–1007. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1180962.

Krueger, J.M., Frank, M.G., Wisor, J.P., and Roy, S. (2016). Sleep Function: Toward Elucidating an Enigma. Sleep Med. Rev. 28, 46–54. https:// doi.org/10.1016/J.SMRV.2015.08.005.

Landolt, H.P., Dijk, D.J., Achermann, P., and Borbe ́ ly, A.A. (1996). Effect of age on the sleep EEG: slow-wave activity and spindle frequency activity in young and middle-aged men. Brain Res. 738, 205–212. https://doi. org/10.1016/S0006-8993(96)00770-6.

Lim, A.S.P., Yu, L., Kowgier, M., Schneider, J.A., Buchman, A.S., and Bennett, D.A. (2013). Modification of the Relationship of the Apolipoprotein E ε4 Allele to the Risk of Alzheimer Disease and Neurofibrillary Tangle Density by Sleep. JAMA Neurol. 70, 1544–1551. https://doi.org/10.1001/ jamaneurol.2013.4215

Ma, C., Li, B., Silverman, D., Ding, X., Li, A., Xiao, C., Huang, G., Worden, K., Muroy, S., Chen, W., et al. (2024). Microglia regulate sleep through calcium-dependent modulation of norepinephrine transmission. Nat. Neurosci. 27, 249–258. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-023-01548-5.

Mander, B.A., Rao, V., Lu, B., Saletin, J.M., Lindquist, J.R., Ancoli-Israel, S., Jagust, W., and Walker, M.P. (2013). Prefrontal atrophy, disrupted NREM slow waves and impaired hippocampal-dependent memory in aging. Nat. Neurosci. 16, 357–364. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3324.

Mander, B.A., Marks, S.M., Vogel, J.W., Rao, V., Lu, B., Saletin, J.M., Ancoli-Israel, S., Jagust, W.J., and Walker, M.P. (2015). b-amyloid disrupts human NREM slow waves and related hippocampus-dependent memory consolidation. Nat. Neurosci. 18, 1051–1057. https://doi.org/10. 1038/nn.4035.

Oh, J., Eser, R.A., Ehrenberg, A.J., Morales, D., Petersen, C., Kudlacek, J., Dunlop, S.R., Theofilas, P., Resende, E.D.P.F., Cosme, C., et al. (2019). Profound degeneration of wake-promoting neurons in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 15, 1253–1263. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jalz.2019.06.3916.

Parhizkar, S., & Holtzman, D. M. (2025). The night’s watch: Exploring how sleep protects against neurodegeneration. Neuron.

Roh, J.H., Jiang, H., Finn, M.B., Stewart, F.R., Mahan, T.E., Cirrito, J.R., Heda, A., Snider, B.J., Li, M., Yanagisawa, M., et al. (2014). Potential role of orexin and sleep modulation in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease. J. Exp. Med. 211, 2487–2496. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem. 20141788.

Simons, J.S., and Spiers, H.J. (2003). Prefrontal and medial temporal lobe interactions in long-term memory. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 4, 637–648.

Zavecz, Z., Shah, V.D., Murillo, O.G., Vallat, R., Mander, B.A., Winer, J.R., Jagust, W.J., and Walker, M.P. (2023). NREM sleep as a novel protective cognitive reserve factor in the face of Alzheimer’s disease pathology. BMC Med. 21, 156. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-023-02811-z.

Zielinski, M.R., McKenna, J.T., and McCarley, R.W. (2016). Functions and mechanisms of sleep. AIMS Neurosci. 3, 67–104. https://doi.org/ 10.3934/Neuroscience.2016.1.67.