Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27926356›Full record

ArticleeLife2016

Inhibitory control of correlated intrinsic variability in cortical networks.

Carsen Stringer, Marius Pachitariu, Nicholas A Steinmetz, Michael Okun, Peter Bartho, Kenneth D Harris, Maneesh Sahani, Nicholas A Lesica

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing 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

56 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Pathological cell assembly dynamics in a striatal MSN network model.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Interneuron-Targeted Disruption ofThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  18. VIP interneurons regulate cortical size tuning and visual perception.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. [Auditory response patterns of mouse primary auditory cortex to sound stimuli].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2022
    Article
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

8 authors.

Carsen StringerGatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9229-4100
Marius PachitariuInstitute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Nicholas A SteinmetzInstitute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Michael OkunInstitute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Peter BarthoMTA TTK NAP B Sleep Oscillations Research Group, Budapest, Hungary.
Kenneth D HarrisInstitute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Maneesh SahaniGatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5560-3341
Nicholas A LesicaEar Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5238-4462

Funding

Wellcome Trust 095668Wellcome Trust 095669Wellcome Trust 100154Wellcome Trust 200942/Z/16/ZWellcome Trust WT086697MA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cortical networks exhibit intrinsic dynamics that drive coordinated, large-scale fluctuations across neuronal populations and create noise correlations that impact sensory coding. To investigate the network-level mechanisms that underlie these dynamics, we developed novel computational techniques to fit a deterministic spiking network model directly to multi-neuron recordings from different rodent species, sensory modalities, and behavioral states. The model generated correlated variability without external noise and accurately reproduced the diverse activity patterns in our recordings. Analysis of the model parameters suggested that differences in noise correlations across recordings were due primarily to differences in the strength of feedback inhibition. Further analysis of our recordings confirmed that putative inhibitory neurons were indeed more active during desynchronized cortical states with weak noise correlations. Our results demonstrate that network models with intrinsically-generated variability can accurately reproduce the activity patterns observed in multi-neuron recordings and suggest that inhibition modulates the interactions between intrinsic dynamics and sensory inputs to control the strength of noise correlations.

Indexed as

Neural InhibitionRodentiaAnimalsCerebral CortexModels, NeurologicalNerve NetGerbilinhibitionmouseneural networksneurosciencerat

Identifiers

PMID27926356
PMCPMC5142814

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.