↓ Skip to main content

Temporally precise control of single-neuron spiking by juxtacellular nanostimulation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurophysiology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Temporally precise control of single-neuron spiking by juxtacellular nanostimulation
Published in
Journal of Neurophysiology, January 2017
DOI 10.1152/jn.00479.2016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maik C Stüttgen, Lourens J P Nonkes, H Rüdiger A P Geis, Paul H Tiesinga, Arthur R Houweling

Abstract

Temporal patterns of action potentials influence a variety of activity-dependent intra- and inter-cellular processes and play an important role in theories of neural coding. Elucidating the mechanisms underlying these phenomena requires imposing spike trains with precisely defined patterns, but this has been challenging due to the limitations of existing stimulation techniques. Here we present a new nanostimulation method providing control over the action potential output of individual cortical neurons. Spikes are elicited through the juxtacellular application of short-duration fluctuating currents ('kurzpulses'), allowing for the sub-millisecond precise and reproducible induction of arbitrary patterns of action potentials at all physiologically relevant firing frequencies (<120 Hz), including minute-long spike trains recorded in freely moving animals. We systematically compared our method to whole-cell current injection as well as optogenetic stimulation and show that nanostimulation performance compares favorably with these techniques. This new nanostimulation approach is easily applied, can be readily performed in awake behaving animals, and thus promises to be a powerful tool for systematic investigations into the temporal elements of neural codes as well as the mechanisms underlying a wide variety of activity-dependent cellular processes.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 39 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 25%
Researcher 10 25%
Professor 5 13%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 23 57%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 13%
Engineering 3 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2017.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurophysiology
#6,905
of 8,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#364,540
of 423,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurophysiology
#82
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,424 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 423,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.