Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29064059›Full record

ArticleJournal of computational neuroscience2017

Spiking resonances in models with the same slow resonant and fast amplifying currents but different subthreshold dynamic properties.

Horacio G Rotstein

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computational neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Horacio G RotsteinFederated Department of Biological Sciences, Rutgers University and New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ, 07102, USA. horacio@njit.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4387-5160
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences 1313861Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences 1608077
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The generation of spiking resonances in neurons (preferred spiking responses to oscillatory inputs) requires the interplay of the intrinsic ionic currents that operate at the subthreshold voltage level and the spiking mechanisms. Combinations of the same types of ionic currents in different parameter regimes may give rise to different types of nonlinearities in the voltage equation (e.g., parabolic- and cubic-like), generating subthreshold (membrane potential) oscillations patterns with different properties. These nonlinearities are not apparent in the model equations, but can be uncovered by plotting the voltage nullclines in the phase-plane diagram. We investigate the spiking resonant properties of conductance-based models that are biophysically equivalent at the subthreshold level (same ionic currents), but dynamically different (parabolic- and cubic-like voltage nullclines). As a case study we consider a model having a persistent sodium and a hyperpolarization-activated (h-) currents, which exhibits subthreshold resonance in the theta frequency band. We unfold the concept of spiking resonance into evoked and output spiking resonance. The former focuses on the input frequencies that are able to generate spikes, while the latter focuses on the output spiking frequencies regardless of the input frequency that generated these spikes. A cell can exhibit one or both types of resonances. We also measure spiking phasonance, which is an extension of subthreshold phasonance (zero-phase-shift response to oscillatory inputs) to the spiking regime. The subthreshold resonant properties of both types of models are communicated to the spiking regime for low enough input amplitudes as the voltage response for the subthreshold resonant frequency band raises above threshold. For higher input amplitudes evoked spiking resonance is no longer present in these models, but output spiking resonance is present primarily in the parabolic-like model due to a cycle skipping mechanism (involving mixed-mode oscillations), while the cubic-like model shows a better 1:1 entrainment. We use dynamical systems tools to explain the underlying mechanisms and the mechanistic differences between the resonance types. Our results demonstrate that the effective time scales that operate at the subthreshold regime to generate intrinsic subthreshold oscillations, mixed-mode oscillations and subthreshold resonance do not necessarily determine the existence of a preferred spiking response to oscillatory inputs in the same frequency band. The results discussed in this paper highlight both the complexity of the suprathreshold responses to oscillatory inputs in neurons having resonant and amplifying currents with different time scales and the fact that the identity of the participating ionic currents is not enough to predict the resulting patterns, but additional dynamic information, captured by the geometric properties of the phase-space diagram, is needed.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalNonlinear DynamicsAction PotentialsAnimalsBiological ClocksBiophysicsHumansModels, TheoreticalNeural ConductionNeuronsBiophysical modelsMembrane potential oscillationsOscillationsPhasonancePreferred frequency responseResonance

Identifiers

PMID29064059
OpenAlexW2951566043

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.