Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29377888›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2018

Biophysical network modeling of the dLGN circuit: Effects of cortical feedback on spatial response properties of relay cells.

Pablo Martínez-Cañada, Milad Hobbi Mobarhan, Geir Halnes, Marianne Fyhn, Christian Morillas, Francisco Pelayo, Gaute T Einevoll

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Pablo Martínez-CañadaDepartment of Computer Architecture and Technology, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Milad Hobbi MobarhanCenter for Integrative Neuroplasticity (CINPLA), University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-1144-8794
Geir HalnesCenter for Integrative Neuroplasticity (CINPLA), University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Marianne FyhnCenter for Integrative Neuroplasticity (CINPLA), University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Christian MorillasDepartment of Computer Architecture and Technology, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4084-6241
Francisco PelayoDepartment of Computer Architecture and Technology, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7402-9648
Gaute T EinevollCenter for Integrative Neuroplasticity (CINPLA), University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-5425-5012

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite half-a-century of research since the seminal work of Hubel and Wiesel, the role of the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) in shaping the visual signals is not properly understood. Placed on route from retina to primary visual cortex in the early visual pathway, a striking feature of the dLGN circuit is that both the relay cells (RCs) and interneurons (INs) not only receive feedforward input from retinal ganglion cells, but also a prominent feedback from cells in layer 6 of visual cortex. This feedback has been proposed to affect synchronicity and other temporal properties of the RC firing. It has also been seen to affect spatial properties such as the center-surround antagonism of thalamic receptive fields, i.e., the suppression of the response to very large stimuli compared to smaller, more optimal stimuli. Here we explore the spatial effects of cortical feedback on the RC response by means of a a comprehensive network model with biophysically detailed, single-compartment and multicompartment neuron models of RCs, INs and a population of orientation-selective layer 6 simple cells, consisting of pyramidal cells (PY). We have considered two different arrangements of synaptic feedback from the ON and OFF zones in the visual cortex to the dLGN: phase-reversed ('push-pull') and phase-matched ('push-push'), as well as different spatial extents of the corticothalamic projection pattern. Our simulation results support that a phase-reversed arrangement provides a more effective way for cortical feedback to provide the increased center-surround antagonism seen in experiments both for flashing spots and, even more prominently, for patch gratings. This implies that ON-center RCs receive direct excitation from OFF-dominated cortical cells and indirect inhibitory feedback from ON-dominated cortical cells. The increased center-surround antagonism in the model is accompanied by spatial focusing, i.e., the maximum RC response occurs for smaller stimuli when feedback is present.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAnimalsComputer SimulationFeedbackGeniculate BodiesHumansInterneuronsMembrane PotentialsNeuronsNormal DistributionOrientationRetinaRetinal Ganglion CellsSynapsesSynaptic TransmissionThalamic Nuclei

Identifiers

PMID29377888
PMCPMC5805346

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.