ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Neural population dynamics of direct electrical stimulation of neocortex.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Intracranial electrical stimulation is foundational in neuroscience and clinical neuromodulation, yet how applied electrical fields engage neural tissue and influences perception remains unclear. Using three orthogonal Neuropixels probes in mouse visual areas, we recorded extracellular voltages and spikes with sub-millisecond resolution in three dimensions around a stimulation source. The evoked potential extended asymmetrically and grew sub-linearly with amplitude, influenced by anatomical heterogeneity. Increasing amplitude increased the density, but not spatial extent, of directly responsive neurons, but fewer than 5% of neurons within the evoked potential were activated. Fast-spiking interneurons were recruited nearer the source, whereas pyramidal neurons showed anisotropic activation. Direct responses were polarity- and amplitude-selective. Sparse direct spiking drove large, asymmetric cortical responses and modulated >50% of neurons at higher amplitudes. Perceptually, mice weakly detected single pulses, and performance did not improve with amplitude. Thus, anatomy and spatiotemporal patterning-not spike counts-govern physiological and perceptual impact, informing biomimetic, multi-contact prostheses.
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.