Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29985917›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2018

Gain control with A-type potassium current: IA as a switch between divisive and subtractive inhibition.

Joshua H Goldwyn, Bradley R Slabe, Joseph B Travers, David Terman

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Joshua H GoldwynDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5733-9089
Bradley R SlabeDepartment of Mathematics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Joseph B TraversDivision of Biosciences, College of Dentistry, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
David TermanDepartment of Mathematics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.

Funding

Inhibitory Modulation and Circuitry in the Rostral Solitary NucleusR01DC016112 · NIDCD · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI TRAVERS, SUSAN P · 2017 to 2021
$2.0M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC016112
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurons process and convey information by transforming barrages of synaptic inputs into spiking activity. Synaptic inhibition typically suppresses the output firing activity of a neuron, and is commonly classified as having a subtractive or divisive effect on a neuron's output firing activity. Subtractive inhibition can narrow the range of inputs that evoke spiking activity by eliminating responses to non-preferred inputs. Divisive inhibition is a form of gain control: it modifies firing rates while preserving the range of inputs that evoke firing activity. Since these two "modes" of inhibition have distinct impacts on neural coding, it is important to understand the biophysical mechanisms that distinguish these response profiles. In this study, we use simulations and mathematical analysis of a neuron model to find the specific conditions (parameter sets) for which inhibitory inputs have subtractive or divisive effects. Significantly, we identify a novel role for the A-type Potassium current (IA). In our model, this fast-activating, slowly-inactivating outward current acts as a switch between subtractive and divisive inhibition. In particular, if IA is strong (large maximal conductance) and fast (activates on a time-scale similar to spike initiation), then inhibition has a subtractive effect on neural firing. In contrast, if IA is weak or insufficiently fast-activating, then inhibition has a divisive effect on neural firing. We explain these findings using dynamical systems methods (plane analysis and fast-slow dissection) to define how a spike threshold condition depends on synaptic inputs and IA. Our findings suggest that neurons can "self-regulate" the gain control effects of inhibition via combinations of synaptic plasticity and/or modulation of the conductance and kinetics of A-type Potassium channels. This novel role for IA would add flexibility to neurons and networks, and may relate to recent observations of divisive inhibitory effects on neurons in the nucleus of the solitary tract.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAction PotentialsAnimalsNeural InhibitionNeuronal PlasticityNeuronsPoisson DistributionPotassium Channels, Voltage-GatedSolitary NucleusSynapsesSynaptic PotentialsPotassium Channels, Voltage-Gated

Identifiers

PMID29985917
PMCPMC6053252

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.