↓ Skip to main content

Network Bursting Dynamics in Excitatory Cortical Neuron Cultures Results from the Combination of Different Adaptive Mechanism

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Network Bursting Dynamics in Excitatory Cortical Neuron Cultures Results from the Combination of Different Adaptive Mechanism
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0075824
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothée Masquelier, Gustavo Deco

Abstract

In the brain, synchronization among cells of an assembly is a common phenomenon, and thought to be functionally relevant. Here we used an in vitro experimental model of cell assemblies, cortical cultures, combined with numerical simulations of a spiking neural network (SNN) to investigate how and why spontaneous synchronization occurs. In order to deal with excitation only, we pharmacologically blocked GABAAergic transmission using bicuculline. Synchronous events in cortical cultures tend to involve almost every cell and to display relatively constant durations. We have thus named these "network spikes" (NS). The inter-NS-intervals (INSIs) proved to be a more interesting phenomenon. In most cortical cultures NSs typically come in series or bursts ("bursts of NSs", BNS), with short (~1 s) INSIs and separated by long silent intervals (tens of s), which leads to bimodal INSI distributions. This suggests that a facilitating mechanism is at work, presumably short-term synaptic facilitation, as well as two fatigue mechanisms: one with a short timescale, presumably short-term synaptic depression, and another one with a longer timescale, presumably cellular adaptation. We thus incorporated these three mechanisms into the SNN, which, indeed, produced realistic BNSs. Next, we systematically varied the recurrent excitation for various adaptation timescales. Strong excitability led to frequent, quasi-periodic BNSs (CV~0), and weak excitability led to rare BNSs, approaching a Poisson process (CV~1). Experimental cultures appear to operate within an intermediate weakly-synchronized regime (CV~0.5), with an adaptation timescale in the 2-8 s range, and well described by a Poisson-with-refractory-period model. Taken together, our results demonstrate that the INSI statistics are indeed informative: they allowed us to infer the mechanisms at work, and many parameters that we cannot access experimentally.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 4%
France 2 2%
Spain 2 2%
Italy 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 87 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Student > Master 9 9%
Professor 6 6%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 12 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 18 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 10%
Physics and Astronomy 10 10%
Computer Science 10 10%
Other 25 26%
Unknown 12 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 October 2013.
All research outputs
#14,178,787
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#115,967
of 193,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,963
of 210,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,932
of 5,127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,989 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 210,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.