Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16433921›Full record

ArticleBMC neuroscience2006

Non-topographical contrast enhancement in the olfactory bulb.

Thomas A Cleland, Praveen Sethupathy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC neuroscience, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 105 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

105 citing papers in PubMed, 205 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Projection-specific Routing of Odor Information in the Olfactory Cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Anterior Olfactory Cortices Differentially Transform Bottom-Up Odor Signals to Produce Inverse Top-Down Outputs.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. A physicochemical model of odor sampling.PLoS computational biology · 2021
    Article
  20. Article

45 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas A ClelandDepartment of Neurobiology and Behavior, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA. tac29@cornell.edu
Praveen Sethupathy
Cornell University · US

Funding

Computational mechanisms in the olfactory bulbR03DC007725 · NIDCD · CORNELL UNIVERSITY · PI CLELAND, THOMAS A · 2006 to 2008
$233k
Dendodendritic computation in the olfactory glomerulusF32DC005727 · NIDCD · CORNELL UNIVERSITY ITHACA · PI CLELAND, THOMAS A · 2002 to 2004
$161k
NIDCD NIH HHS DC005727NIDCD NIH HHS F32 DC005727
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContrast enhancement within primary stimulus representations is a common feature of sensory systems that regulates the discrimination of similar stimuli. Whereas most sensory stimulus features can be mapped onto one or two dimensions of quality or location (e.g., frequency or retinotopy), the analogous similarities among odor stimuli are distributed high-dimensionally, necessarily yielding a chemotopically fragmented map upon the surface of the olfactory bulb. While olfactory contrast enhancement has been attributed to decremental lateral inhibitory processes among olfactory bulb projection neurons modeled after those in the retina, the two-dimensional topology of this mechanism is intrinsically incapable of mediating effective contrast enhancement on such fragmented maps. Consequently, current theories are unable to explain the existence of olfactory contrast enhancement.

resultsWe describe a novel neural circuit mechanism, non-topographical contrast enhancement (NTCE), which enables contrast enhancement among high-dimensional odor representations exhibiting unpredictable patterns of similarity. The NTCE algorithm relies solely on local intraglomerular computations and broad feedback inhibition, and is consistent with known properties of the olfactory bulb input layer. Unlike mechanisms based upon lateral projections, NTCE does not require a built-in foreknowledge of the similarities in molecular receptive ranges expressed by different olfactory bulb glomeruli, and is independent of the physical location of glomeruli within the olfactory bulb.

conclusionNon-topographical contrast enhancement demonstrates how intrinsically high-dimensional sensory data can be represented and processed within a physically two-dimensional neural cortex while retaining the capacity to represent stimulus similarity. In a biophysically constrained computational model of the olfactory bulb, NTCE successfully mediates contrast enhancement among odorant representations in the natural, high-dimensional similarity space defined by the olfactory receptor complement and underlies the concentration-independence of odor quality representations.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, NeurologicalOdorantsAlgorithmsDiscrimination, PsychologicalNeurons, AfferentOlfactory BulbOlfactory Receptor Neurons

Identifiers

PMID16433921
PMCPMC1368991
OpenAlexW2107943317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.