↓ Skip to main content

Inhibition shapes response selectivity in the inferior colliculus by gain modulation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neural Circuits, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Inhibition shapes response selectivity in the inferior colliculus by gain modulation
Published in
Frontiers in Neural Circuits, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fncir.2012.00067
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joshua X. Gittelman, Le Wang, H. S. Colburn, George D. Pollak

Abstract

Pharmacological block of inhibition is often used to determine if inhibition contributes to spike selectivity, in which a preferred stimulus evokes more spikes than a null stimulus. When inhibitory block reduces spike selectivity, a common interpretation is that differences between the preferred- and null-evoked inhibitions created the selectivity from less-selective excitatory inputs. In models based on empirical properties of cells from the inferior colliculus (IC) of awake bats, we show that inhibitory differences are not required. Instead, inhibition can enhance spike selectivity by changing the gain, the ratio of output spikes to input current. Within the model, we made preferred stimuli that evoked more spikes than null stimuli using five distinct synaptic mechanisms. In two cases, synaptic selectivity (the differences between the preferred and null inputs) was entirely excitatory, and in two it was entirely inhibitory. In each case, blocking inhibition eliminated spike selectivity. Thus, observing spike rates following inhibitory block did not distinguish among the cases where synaptic selectivity was entirely excitatory or inhibitory. We then did the same modeling experiment using empirical synaptic conductances derived from responses to preferred and null sounds. In most cases, inhibition in the model enhanced spike selectivity mainly by gain modulation and firing rate reduction. Sometimes, inhibition reduced the null gain to zero, eliminating null-evoked spikes. In some cases, inhibition increased the preferred gain more than the null gain, enhancing the difference between the preferred- and null-evoked spikes. Finally, inhibition kept firing rates low. When selectivity is quantified by the selectivity index (SI, the ratio of the difference to the sum of the spikes evoked by the preferred and null stimuli), inhibitory block reduced the SI by increasing overall firing rates. These results are consistent with inhibition shaping spike selectivity by gain control.

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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 6%
Germany 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 43 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 21%
Researcher 10 21%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 12 25%
Unknown 4 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 40%
Neuroscience 16 33%
Psychology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 7 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 18 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,166,700
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#1,023
of 1,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,187
of 244,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#44
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 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 1,207 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. 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 244,101 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 73 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.