↓ Skip to main content

Multiple Approaches to the Investigation of Cell Assembly in Memory Research—Present and Future

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 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
Multiple Approaches to the Investigation of Cell Assembly in Memory Research—Present and Future
Published in
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnsys.2018.00021
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshio Sakurai, Yuma Osako, Yuta Tanisumi, Eriko Ishihara, Junya Hirokawa, Hiroyuki Manabe

Abstract

In this review article we focus on research methodologies for detecting the actual activity of cell assemblies, which are populations of functionally connected neurons that encode information in the brain. We introduce and discuss traditional and novel experimental methods and those currently in development and briefly discuss their advantages and disadvantages for the detection of cell-assembly activity. First, we introduce the electrophysiological method, i.e., multineuronal recording, and review former and recent examples of studies showing models of dynamic coding by cell assemblies in behaving rodents and monkeys. We also discuss how the firing correlation of two neurons reflects the firing synchrony among the numerous surrounding neurons that constitute cell assemblies. Second, we review the recent outstanding studies that used the novel method of optogenetics to show causal relationships between cell-assembly activity and behavioral change. Third, we review the most recently developed method of live-cell imaging, which facilitates the simultaneous observation of firings of a large number of neurons in behaving rodents. Currently, all these available methods have both advantages and disadvantages, and no single measurement method can directly and precisely detect the actual activity of cell assemblies. The best strategy is to combine the available methods and utilize each of their advantages with the technique of operant conditioning of multiple-task behaviors in animals and, if necessary, with brain-machine interface technology to verify the accuracy of neural information detected as cell-assembly activity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 21%
Student > Master 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 22 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 19%
Psychology 3 6%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Other 3 6%
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 02 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,606,163
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#1,132
of 1,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,641
of 330,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#20
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 330,719 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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.