ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2023
Odor encoding by signals in the olfactory bulb.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond Membrane Potential: Exploiting Signal Complexity in Genetically Encoded Voltage Indicators.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- High-Accuracy Detection of Odor Presence from Olfactory Bulb Local Field Potentials via Deep Neural Networks.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Survey of temporal coding of sensory information.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2025Article
- Odor representation and coding by the mitral/tufted cells in the olfactory bulb.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
To understand the operation of the olfactory system, it is essential to know how information is encoded in the olfactory bulb. We applied Shannon information theoretic methods to address this, with signals from up to 57 glomeruli simultaneously optically imaged from presynaptic inputs in glomeruli in the mouse dorsal (dOB) and lateral (lOB) olfactory bulb, in response to six exemplar pure chemical odors. We discovered that, first, the tuning of these signals from glomeruli to a set of odors is remarkably broad, with a mean sparseness of 0.83 and a mean signal correlation of 0.64. Second, both of these factors contribute to the low information that is available from the responses of even populations of many tens of glomeruli, which was only 1.35 bits across 33 glomeruli on average, compared with the 2.58 bits required to perfectly encode these six odors. Third, although there is considerable interest in the possibility of temporal encoding of stimulus including odor identity, the amount of information in the temporal aspects of the presynaptic glomerular responses was low (mean 0.11 bits) and, importantly, was redundant with respect to the information available from the rates. Fourth, the information from simultaneously recorded glomeruli asymptotes very gradually and nonlinearly, showing that glomeruli do not have independent responses. Fifth, the information from a population became available quite rapidly, within 100 ms of sniff onset, and the peak of the glomerular response was at 200 ms. Sixth, the information from the lOB was not additive with that of the dOB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.