Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Research Articles, Systems/Circuits

Cortical Neural Activity Predicts Sensory Acuity Under Optogenetic Manipulation

John J. Briguglio, Mark Aizenberg, Vijay Balasubramanian and Maria N. Geffen
Journal of Neuroscience 21 February 2018, 38 (8) 2094-2105; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2457-17.2017
John J. Briguglio
1Department of Physics, Department of Otorhinolaryngology HNS, Department of Neuroscience, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104,
2Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Neuroscience, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, and
3Janelia Research Campus, Ashburn, Virginia 20147
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for John J. Briguglio
Mark Aizenberg
2Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Neuroscience, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mark Aizenberg
Vijay Balasubramanian
1Department of Physics, Department of Otorhinolaryngology HNS, Department of Neuroscience, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Vijay Balasubramanian
Maria N. Geffen
2Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Neuroscience, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Maria N. Geffen
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Extended Data
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Measurement of behavioral frequency discrimination acuity. A, Schematic of measurement of frequency discrimination acuity in mouse. Left, Startle response measured as pressure the subject exerts on a platform. Right, Sound stimulus time course: an ongoing background tone (light gray, f1) is followed by a brief prepulse tone of different frequency (dark gray band, f2) and then by a startle noise (thin black band, SN). B, Normalized time course of platform pressure during the startle response to noise for different prepulse tones for an exemplar mouse. Time relative to SN onset. C, PPI measured as reduction in the acoustic startle response as a function of the frequency shift (Δf) between the background and prepulse tones (see Materials and Methods, Eq. 1) of an exemplar mouse. PPI does not reach 100% because, even with an easily identifiable prepulse tones, the animal still startles. Dots, Data; solid line, fit.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Measurement of neurometric frequency discrimination acuity. A, Left, Schematic of electrophysiological recording of neuronal responses in the primary auditory cortex (A1) in awake mouse. Right, Stimulus consisting of a pseudorandom sequence of pure tones at varying frequency and intensity levels. B, Representative frequency response function for a single neuron (f1 = background tone in Fig. 1). Black dots, Data; black line, fit. C, Fisher information computed as in Equation 5 for tone discrimination (black) computed on the basis of frequency response functions (gray dashed) of all frequency-tuned neurons (n = 14) recorded in the same mouse as in B. D, Neurometric threshold for decoding frequency (solid) computed on the basis of the inverse square root of Fisher information computed in C. Neurometric threshold based on the recorded population lies above behavioral threshold for discrimination around f1 (dashed line). Light blue band indicates the region in frequency space from which behavioral measurements were taken.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Optogenetic manipulation of PV activity shifts behavioral and neurometric frequency discrimination thresholds in individual subjects. A–C, Baseline firing rate of light-on versus light-off trials for all frequency-tuned neurons pooled across subjects in PV-ChR2 (blue), PV-Arch (green), and CamK2a-ChR2 (red) mice, respectively. D–F, PPI as a function of tone frequency shift for exemplar mice. Best estimated thresholds (dashed lines) and uncertainties (overlaid gray rectangle) are plotted for reference. Black, Light-off trials; blue, green, red, light-on trials. Dots, Data; solid lines, best fit curve. G–I, Fisher information computed using tuning curves using neurons recorded from mice in D–F. Frequencies used are indicated by the blue region. J–L, Neurometric threshold estimate as inverse square root of Fisher information (solid) and behavioral threshold at f1 (horizontal dotted) for the same mice as D–F. Light blue bands indicate the region in frequency space from which behavioral measurements were taken.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Changes in A1 tone responses due to optogenetic manipulations predict changes in behavioral frequency discrimination acuity across individuals. A, Behavioral versus scaled neurometric frequency discrimination thresholds (Table 4-1). Neurometric threshold (computed as inverse of Fisher information squared for tone-evoked responses from all neurons recorded in each mouse) is scaled to an effective population size of 1000 neurons to control for differences in numbers of measured neurons. Changing this scale factor is equivalent to changing y-axis labels. The scaled neurometric threshold based on the small recorded population was significantly (but weakly so, C = 0.37, p = 0.02) correlated with the behavioral threshold (computed as the shift in frequency between the background and prepulse tone that evoked 50% of the maximum PPI). Each of 19 mice contributes two data points, representing the threshold computed on the basis of light-on and light-off trials. Gray lines connect light-on and light-off estimates for each mouse. B, Index of change in neurometric threshold (difference between thresholds computed from data on light-on vs light-off trials divided by the sum) was strongly correlated with the behavioral frequency discrimination (C = 0.59, p = 0.007). There is one data point for each mouse. Gray line is the best fit line through the origin. Behavioral errors were computed as described in the Materials and Methods.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Number of frequency-tuned neurons required to account for behavioral sensitivity for each mouse (Eq. 11). Average of both light-on and light-off conditions is 1000 neurons.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Optogenetic manipulations do not change neuronal variability or correlations. A–C, Fano factor pooled across mice distributions are similar under light-on and light-off conditions. A, PV-ChR2; B, PV-Arch; C, CamK2a-ChR2. Black, Light-off trials; blue, green, red, light-on trials. D–F, Pairwise correlation distributions pooled across mice are similar under light-on and light-off conditions. D, PV-ChR2; E, PV-Arch; F, CamK2a-ChR2. Colors same as in A. G, Increasing Fano factor reduces Fisher information, shown here for a single neuron with Gaussian tuning curve (amplitude 8 spikes/s, center frequency 20 kHZ, tuning width 0.2 decades) with a constant baseline (2 spikes/s). H, Incorporating the measured Fano factors into our model of neuronal firing via a generalized Poisson model has a weak effect on the predicted threshold.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    Fano factor and correlation scatter plots comparing light-on and light-off conditions. A–C, Fano factor with and without light on for PV-ChR2, PV-Arch, and Pyr-ChR2 mice, respectively. D–F, Pairwise correlations with and without light on for PV-ChR2, PV-Arch, and Pyr-ChR2 mice, respectively.

  • Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Overrepresenting a specific frequency can increase or reduce sensitivity to that frequency. A, Fisher information (black) computed from a homogeneous population of neurons (responses in gray) has an even sensitivity across a broad range of frequencies. A sample tuning curve (red) is used to illustrate neural transformations in B and C. Neurons have baseline activity of 2 spikes/s, peak response of 10 spikes/s, peak frequency spaced 1/20th of a decade apart, with an HWHM of 0.1 decades. B, Fisher information is plotted for a neural population overrepresenting frequency f1 by shifting peak frequencies halfway between their original location in A and f1. Fisher information approximately doubles near f1, but is reduced near the edges. C, Fisher information is plotted for a neural population overrepresenting frequency f1 by adding a Gaussian bump near f1 with an amplitude that diminishes with distance between the preferred frequency of the neuron and f1. Fisher information is diminished at f1, leading to reduced sensitivity at this frequency despite its overrepresentation within the population firing activity.

Extended Data

  • Figures
  • Table 4-1

    Table containing mouse identity, type, relevant behavioral and neurometric thresholds, as well as number of recorded neurons. Neurometric threshold computed using Fisher information is scaled to an effective population size of 1000 neurons to control for differences in numbers of measured neurons. Download Table 4-1, XLSX file

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 38 (8)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 38, Issue 8
21 Feb 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Cortical Neural Activity Predicts Sensory Acuity Under Optogenetic Manipulation
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Cortical Neural Activity Predicts Sensory Acuity Under Optogenetic Manipulation
John J. Briguglio, Mark Aizenberg, Vijay Balasubramanian, Maria N. Geffen
Journal of Neuroscience 21 February 2018, 38 (8) 2094-2105; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2457-17.2017

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Cortical Neural Activity Predicts Sensory Acuity Under Optogenetic Manipulation
John J. Briguglio, Mark Aizenberg, Vijay Balasubramanian, Maria N. Geffen
Journal of Neuroscience 21 February 2018, 38 (8) 2094-2105; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2457-17.2017
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • auditory cortex
  • behavior
  • computational modeling
  • excitatory–inhibitory circuits
  • frequency discrimination
  • optogenetics

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Research Articles

  • Evidence that ultrafast non-quantal transmission underlies synchronized vestibular action potential generation
  • Nfia is Critical for AII Amacrine Cell Production: Selective Bipolar Cell Dependencies and Diminished ERG
  • Multimodal Imaging for Validation and Optimization of Ion Channel-Based Chemogenetics in Nonhuman Primates
Show more Research Articles

Systems/Circuits

  • Evidence that ultrafast non-quantal transmission underlies synchronized vestibular action potential generation
  • Nfia is Critical for AII Amacrine Cell Production: Selective Bipolar Cell Dependencies and Diminished ERG
  • Echoes from Intrinsic Connectivity Networks in the Subcortex
Show more Systems/Circuits
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2023 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.