Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26609162›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2015

Electrical and Optical Activation of Mesoscale Neural Circuits with Implications for Coding.

Daniel C Millard, Clarissa J Whitmire, Clare A Gollnick, Christopher J Rozell, Garrett B Stanley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Brain state limits propagation of neural signals in laminar cortical circuits.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Widespread activation of awake mouse cortex by electrical stimulation.International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering : [proceedings]. International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Long-range projections coordinate distributed brain-wide neural activity with a specific spatiotemporal profile.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016
    Article
  19. Review
  20. What do phasic cholinergic signals do?Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2016
    Review
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

5 authors.

Daniel C MillardDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30332, and.
Clarissa J WhitmireDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30332, and.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5789-4293
Clare A GollnickDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30332, and.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7481-3552
Christopher J RozellSchool of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332.
Garrett B StanleyDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30332, and garrett.stanley@bme.gatech.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2039-7706

Funding

Thalamic synchrony and the gating of information flow to cortexR01NS048285 · NINDS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI STANLEY, GARRETT B. · 2004 to 2014
$2.3M
In-vivo circuit activity measurement at single cell, sub-threshold resolutionU01MH106027 · NIMH · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI FOREST, CRAIG, STANLEY, GARRETT B. · 2014 to 2016
$1.5M
In-vivo control of information flow by artificial stimulation: ephys and behaviorR01NS085447 · NINDS · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI STANLEY, GARRETT B. · 2013 to 2016
$1.2M
From Cells to Systems and Applications: Computational Neuroscience Training at EmT90DA032466 · NIDA · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI JAEGER, DIETER, STANLEY, GARRETT B. · 2011 to 2015
$817k
Controlling thalamic state for somatosensory information flow in thalamusF31NS089412 · NINDS · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI WHITMIRE, CLARISSA J · 2014 to 2016
$129k
NIDA NIH HHS T90 DA032466NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH106027NINDS NIH HHS F31 NS089412NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS048285NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS085447NINDS NIH HHS R01NS085447,NINDS NIH HHS R01NS48285
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial activation of neural circuitry through electrical microstimulation and optogenetic techniques is important for both scientific discovery of circuit function and for engineered approaches to alleviate various disorders of the nervous system. However, evidence suggests that neural activity generated by artificial stimuli differs dramatically from normal circuit function, in terms of both the local neuronal population activity at the site of activation and the propagation to downstream brain structures. The precise nature of these differences and the implications for information processing remain unknown. Here, we used voltage-sensitive dye imaging of primary somatosensory cortex in the anesthetized rat in response to deflections of the facial vibrissae and electrical or optogenetic stimulation of thalamic neurons that project directly to the somatosensory cortex. Although the different inputs produced responses that were similar in terms of the average cortical activation, the variability of the cortical response was strikingly different for artificial versus sensory inputs. Furthermore, electrical microstimulation resulted in highly unnatural spatial activation of cortex, whereas optical input resulted in spatial cortical activation that was similar to that induced by sensory inputs. A thalamocortical network model suggested that observed differences could be explained by differences in the way in which artificial and natural inputs modulate the magnitude and synchrony of population activity. Finally, the variability structure in the response for each case strongly influenced the optimal inputs for driving the pathway from the perspective of an ideal observer of cortical activation when considered in the context of information transmission. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Artificial activation of neural circuitry through electrical microstimulation and optogenetic techniques is important for both scientific discovery and clinical translation. However, neural activity generated by these artificial means differs dramatically from normal circuit function, both locally and in the propagation to downstream brain structures. The precise nature of these differences and the implications for information processing remain unknown. The significance of this work is in quantifying the differences, elucidating likely mechanisms underlying the differences, and determining the implications for information processing.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerAnimalsElectric StimulationFemaleNerve NetOptogeneticsRatsRats, Sprague-DawleySomatosensory CortexThalamusVibrissaecodingoptogeneticsstimulationtactilevibrissaVSD

Identifiers

PMID26609162
PMCPMC4659829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.