Published eLetters
Guidelines
As a forum for professional feedback, submissions of letters are open to all. You do not need to be a subscriber. To avoid redundancy, we urge you to read other people's letters before submitting your own. Name, current appointment, place of work, and email address are required to send a letter, and will be published with your review. We also require that you declare any competing financial interests. Unprofessional submissions will not be considered or responded to.
Jump to comment:
- Page navigation anchor for RE: In Vivo electrophysiology: neuronal samplingRE: In Vivo electrophysiology: neuronal sampling
This editorial provides some excellent suggestions for improving reports of recording. No mention was made of a fundamental problem with most population studies: biased sampling. Most electrodes used for extracellular recording are heavily biased toward larger neurons because these neurons generate currents that spread over larger volumes. Small neurons are rarely sampled with such electrodes. This would not be a problem if soma size did not vary with physiological properties, but numerous studies have shown that not to be the case in some areas. Conclusions should explicitly note this problem, and electrophysiologists should attempt to record with fine-tipped, higher impedance electrodes to control for biased sampling.
Competing Interests: None declared.