Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34788286›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2021

Cross-population coupling of neural activity based on Gaussian process current source densities.

Natalie Klein, Joshua H Siegle, Tobias Teichert, Robert E Kass

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Natalie KleinDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7532-4013
Joshua H SiegleMindScope Program, Allen Institute, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7736-4844
Tobias TeichertDepartments of Psychiatry and Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Robert E KassDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.

Funding

Diversity supplement to Analysis of Nonstationary Point Process DataR01MH064537 · NIMH · CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIVERSITY · PI KASS, ROBERT E · 2001 to 2024
$7.2M
Understanding the synaptic, cellular and circuit events of MEG & EEG using a vertically translational cross-species approachRF1MH114223 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI DOIRON, BRENT D., SALISBURY, DEAN F · 2017 to 2018
$4.0M
Echoic Memory Function and Physiology in the Rhesus MacaqueR01MH120117 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI TEICHERT, TOBIAS · 2019 to 2023
$2.0M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH064537NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH120117NIMH NIH HHS RF1 MH114223
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because local field potentials (LFPs) arise from multiple sources in different spatial locations, they do not easily reveal coordinated activity across neural populations on a trial-to-trial basis. As we show here, however, once disparate source signals are decoupled, their trial-to-trial fluctuations become more accessible, and cross-population correlations become more apparent. To decouple sources we introduce a general framework for estimation of current source densities (CSDs). In this framework, the set of LFPs result from noise being added to the transform of the CSD by a biophysical forward model, while the CSD is considered to be the sum of a zero-mean, stationary, spatiotemporal Gaussian process, having fast and slow components, and a mean function, which is the sum of multiple time-varying functions distributed across space, each varying across trials. We derived biophysical forward models relevant to the data we analyzed. In simulation studies this approach improved identification of source signals compared to existing CSD estimation methods. Using data recorded from primate auditory cortex, we analyzed trial-to-trial fluctuations in both steady-state and task-evoked signals. We found cortical layer-specific phase coupling between two probes and showed that the same analysis applied directly to LFPs did not recover these patterns. We also found task-evoked CSDs to be correlated across probes, at specific cortical depths. Using data from Neuropixels probes in mouse visual areas, we again found evidence for depth-specific phase coupling of primary visual cortex and lateromedial area based on the CSDs.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAnimalsComputer SimulationPrimary Visual Cortex

Identifiers

PMID34788286
PMCPMC8635346

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.