Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Update 2024-09-09-data_reuse_000458.md
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
bendichter authored Dec 10, 2024
1 parent f0819de commit 266b104
Showing 1 changed file with 2 additions and 4 deletions.
6 changes: 2 additions & 4 deletions blog/2024-09-09-data_reuse_000458.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ After their experiments, Claar and her team published their data on DANDI, ensur

[Figure1](../../../assets/data_reuse_000458_elife-fig7.jpg)

_Figure 1: Brain state modulates the ERP via cortico-thalamo-cortical interactions. (A) Butterfly plot of ERPs during non-running (quiet wakefulness), running (active wakefulness), and isoflurane-anesthetized states. (B) Normalized firing rate, reported as a z-score of the average, pre-stimulus firing rate, of all RS neurons recorded by the Neuropixels probes targeting the stimulated cortex (MO) and SM-TH. Reproduced from “Cortico-thalamo-cortical interactions modulate electrically evoked EEG responses in mice”.
_**Figure 1: Brain state modulates the ERP via cortico-thalamo-cortical interactions.** (A) Butterfly plot of ERPs during non-running (quiet wakefulness), running (active wakefulness), and isoflurane-anesthetized states. (B) Normalized firing rate, reported as a z-score of the average, pre-stimulus firing rate, of all RS neurons recorded by the Neuropixels probes targeting the stimulated cortex (MO) and SM-TH. Reproduced from “Cortico-thalamo-cortical interactions modulate electrically evoked EEG responses in mice”._

## A New Perspective: Zooming in on Synaptic Potentials
Just a few months later, in November 2023, Drs. Richard Burman, Paul Brodersen and colleagues at the University of Oxford wrote a paper that included reanalysis of this data.
Expand All @@ -53,9 +53,7 @@ This data provides evidence for the hypothesized bidirectional relationship.

![Figure2]("assets/data_reuse_000458_cell-fig4.jpg")

_Figure 2: Shunting inhibition promotes local network desynchronization and response flexibility. (A) High-density Neuropixels (NPXs) recordings were used to compare spiking activity in the same cortical neurons under awake and anesthetized conditions. (B) Example raster plots show the spiking activity of a population of neurons in somatosensory cortex (SS). Spiking activity is shown across three stimulation trials for each condition. (C) Neuronal synchrony on a trial-to-trial basis (top) and the entropy of the peri-stimulus histogram (bottom) were calculated for each of the 662 recorded neurons under awake and anesthetized conditions (17 probe recordings in 16 mice). Each dot corresponds to a single neuron and the dashed line indicates the line of equality. (D) Neurons in the awake condition exhibited lower synchrony (top; Aw.: 0.325 ± 0.005 vs. An.: 0.393 ± 0.007, p < 0.001, paired t test) and higher entropy (bottom; Aw.: 1.347 ± 0.018 nats vs. An.: 1.111 ± 0.020 nats, p < 0.001, paired t test). (E) Schematic of network model consisting of interconnected excitatory pyramidal neurons (Pyr.) and inhibitory interneurons (IN). EGABAAR in the pyramidal neurons was adjusted relative to the RMP to create two different conditions: a shunting (Shunt.) and a hyperpolarizing (Hyperpol.) EGABAAR condition. Spiking activity was evoked by delivering brief depolarizing currents (input) of varying amplitudes to each neuron in the network. (F) Raster plots for the same population of pyramidal neurons (n = 50) in the shunting (left) and hyperpolarizing (right) EGABAAR conditions. (G) Synchrony (top) and entropy (bottom) for pyramidal neurons in the shunting and hyperpolarizing EGABAAR conditions (n = 1,000 randomly selected). Dashed line indicates the line of equality. (H) Neurons in the shunting EGABAAR condition exhibited lower synchrony (Shunt: 0.784 ± 0.001 vs. Hyperpol: 0.881 ± 0.001, p < 0.001, paired t test) and higher entropy (Shunt: 0.451 ± 0.002 nats vs. Hyperpol: 0.197 ± 0.002 nats, p < 0.001, paired t test) (n = 16,000 pyramidal neurons from the model). ∗∗∗p < 0.001. MO, motor cortex; Stim., electrical stimulation; TH, thalamus. Reproduced from “Active cortical networks promote shunting fast synaptic inhibition <i>in vivo</i>”.
</figcaption>
</figure>
_**Figure 2: Shunting inhibition promotes local network desynchronization and response flexibility.** (A) High-density Neuropixels (NPXs) recordings were used to compare spiking activity in the same cortical neurons under awake and anesthetized conditions. (B) Example raster plots show the spiking activity of a population of neurons in somatosensory cortex (SS). Spiking activity is shown across three stimulation trials for each condition. (C) Neuronal synchrony on a trial-to-trial basis (top) and the entropy of the peri-stimulus histogram (bottom) were calculated for each of the 662 recorded neurons under awake and anesthetized conditions (17 probe recordings in 16 mice). Each dot corresponds to a single neuron and the dashed line indicates the line of equality. (D) Neurons in the awake condition exhibited lower synchrony (top; Aw.: 0.325 ± 0.005 vs. An.: 0.393 ± 0.007, p < 0.001, paired t test) and higher entropy (bottom; Aw.: 1.347 ± 0.018 nats vs. An.: 1.111 ± 0.020 nats, p < 0.001, paired t test). (E) Schematic of network model consisting of interconnected excitatory pyramidal neurons (Pyr.) and inhibitory interneurons (IN). EGABAAR in the pyramidal neurons was adjusted relative to the RMP to create two different conditions: a shunting (Shunt.) and a hyperpolarizing (Hyperpol.) EGABAAR condition. Spiking activity was evoked by delivering brief depolarizing currents (input) of varying amplitudes to each neuron in the network. (F) Raster plots for the same population of pyramidal neurons (n = 50) in the shunting (left) and hyperpolarizing (right) EGABAAR conditions. (G) Synchrony (top) and entropy (bottom) for pyramidal neurons in the shunting and hyperpolarizing EGABAAR conditions (n = 1,000 randomly selected). Dashed line indicates the line of equality. (H) Neurons in the shunting EGABAAR condition exhibited lower synchrony (Shunt: 0.784 ± 0.001 vs. Hyperpol: 0.881 ± 0.001, p < 0.001, paired t test) and higher entropy (Shunt: 0.451 ± 0.002 nats vs. Hyperpol: 0.197 ± 0.002 nats, p < 0.001, paired t test) (n = 16,000 pyramidal neurons from the model). ∗∗∗p < 0.001. MO, motor cortex; Stim., electrical stimulation; TH, thalamus. Reproduced from “Active cortical networks promote shunting fast synaptic inhibition <i>in vivo</i>”._

## Bridging Scales: From Synapses to Networks
Together, these two studies provide a rich, multi-level account of what happens to brain activity under anesthesia. They span from macroscale brain signals recorded by EEG all the way down to microscale synaptic responses from a single receptor type.
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 266b104

Please sign in to comment.