QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

HOME  |   SEARCH  |   ARCHIVE  |   SUBSCRIBE  |   CONTACT  |   HELP

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (18) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Smith, G. D. Articles by Sherman, S. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Smith, G. D. Articles by Sherman, S. M. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB CALCIUM COMPOUNDS CALCIUM, ELEMENTAL

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

The Journal of Neuroscience, December 1, 2002, 22(23):10242-10250

Detectability of Excitatory versus Inhibitory Drive in an Integrate-and-Fire-or-Burst Thalamocortical Relay Neuron Model

Gregory D. Smith¹ and S. Murray Sherman²

¹ Department of Applied Science, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187, and ² Department of Neurobiology, State University of New York, Stony Brook, New York 11794-5230

Although inhibitory inputs are often viewed as equal but opposite to excitatory inputs, excitatory inputs may alter the firing of postsynaptic cells more effectively than inhibitory inputs. This is because spike cancellation produced by an inhibitory input requires coincidence in time, whereas an excitatory input can add spikes with less temporal constraint. To test for such potential differences, especially in the context of the function of thalamocortical (TC) relay nuclei, we used a stochastic "integrate-and-fire-or-burst" TC neuron model to quantify the detectability of excitatory and inhibitory drive in the presence and absence of the low-threshold Ca²⁺ current, I_T, and the hyperpolarization-activated cation conductance, I_sag. We find that excitatory inputs are generally superior drivers compared with inhibitory inputs in part because spontaneous activity of a postsynaptic neuron is not required in the case of excitatory drive. Interestingly, the presence of the low-threshold Ca²⁺ current, I_T in a postsynaptic neuron allows the robust detection of inhibitory drive over a certain range of spontaneous and driven activity, a range that can be extended by the presence of the hyperpolarization-activated cation conductance, I_sag. These simulations suggest a possible reinterpretation of the role of inhibitory inputs, such as those to the thalamus.

Key words: thalamus; inhibition; excitation; basal ganglia; neuron model; driver; modulator

---

Copyright © 2002 Society for Neuroscience  0270-6474/02/222310242-09$05.00/0

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. H. Kim, S. Ohara, and F. A. Lenz Mental Arithmetic Leads to Multiple Discrete Changes From Baseline in the Firing Patterns of Human Thalamic Neurons J Neurophysiol, April 1, 2009; 101(4): 2107 - 2119. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Elias, Y. Ritov, and H. Bergman Balance of Increases and Decreases in Firing Rate of the Spontaneous Activity of Basal Ganglia High-Frequency Discharge Neurons J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2008; 100(6): 3086 - 3104. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Guo, J. E. Rubin, C. C. McIntyre, J. L. Vitek, and D. Terman Thalamocortical Relay Fidelity Varies Across Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation Protocols in a Data-Driven Computational Model J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2008; 99(3): 1477 - 1492. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home  |   Search  |   Archive  |   Subscribe  |   Contact  |   Help