Recording in vivo from the same neuron with two different methods is difficult. It requires blindly moving each probe to within ∼100 μm of one another and for this reason such “dual-recordings” are rare. However, comparing the signals measured by different techniques is necessary to understand what they measure. We developed a method to precisely align the axes of two manipulators and used it to gather a “ground truth” dataset for dense extracellular polytrodes.

Extracellular microelectrodes have been widely used to measure brain activity, yet there are still basic questions about the requirements for a good extracellular microelectrode. One common source of confusion is how much an electrode’s impedance affects the amplitude of extracellular spikes and background noise. Here we quantify the effect of an electrode’s impedance on data quality in extracellular recordings, which is crucial for both the detection of spikes and their assignment to the correct neurons. This study employs commercial polytrodes containing 32 electrodes (177 μm2) arranged in a dense array. This allowed us to directly compare, side-by-side, the same extracellular signals measured by modified low impedance (∼100 kΩ) microelectrodes with unmodified high impedance (∼1 MΩ) microelectrodes. We begin with an evaluation of existing protocols to lower the impedance of the electrodes. The poly (3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)-polystyrene sulfonate (PEDOT-PSS) electrodeposition protocol is a simple, stable, and reliable method for decreasing the impedance of a microelectrode up to 10-fold. We next record in vivo using polytrodes that are modified in a ‘chess board’ pattern, such that the signal of one neuron is detected by multiple coated and non-coated electrodes. The performance of the coated and non-coated electrodes is then compared on measures of background noise and amplitude of the detected action potentials. If the proper recording system is used, then the impedance of a microelectrode within the range of standard polytrodes (∼0.1 to 2 MΩ) does not greatly affect data quality and spike sorting. This study should encourage neuroscientists to stop worrying about one more unknown.

Cross-validating new methods for recording neural activity is necessary to accurately interpret and compare the signals they measure. Here we describe a procedure for precisely aligning two probes for in vivo "paired-recordings" such that the spiking activity of a single neuron is monitored with both a dense extracellular silicon polytrode and a juxtacellular micro-pipette. Our new method allows for efficient, reliable, and automated guidance of both probes to the same neural structure with micron resolution. We also describe a new dataset of paired-recordings, which is available online. We propose that our novel targeting system, and ever expanding cross-validation dataset, will be vital to the development of new algorithms for automatically detecting/sorting single-units, characterizing new electrode materials/designs, and resolving nagging questions regarding the origin and nature of extracellular neural signals.

The motivation of using metal oxides is mainly due to its charge storage capabilities, and electrocatalytic, electrochromic and photoelectrochemical properties. But comparing with bulk, nanostructured materials present several advantages related with the spatial confinement, large fraction of surface atoms, high surface energy, strong surface adsorption and increased surface to volume ratio, which greatly improves the performances of these materials. The deposition of this materials can be accomplished by a variety of physical and chemical techniques but nowadays, electrodeposited metal oxides are generally used in both laboratories and industries due to the flexibility to control structure and morphology of the oxide electrodes combined with a reduced cost. Tungsten oxide (WO 3 ) is a well-studied semiconductor and is used for several applications as chromogenic material, sensor and catalyst. The major important features is its low cost and availability, improved stability, easy morphologic and structural control of the nanostructures, reversible change of conductivity, high sensitivity, selectivity and biocompatibility. For the electrodeposition of WO 3 , more than one method can be adopted: electrodeposition from a precursor solution, anodic oxidation, and electrodeposition of already produced nanoparticles; however, in this case the mechanism of the electrodeposition is not fully understood. In this chapter, a review of the latest published work of electrodeposited nanostructured metal oxides is provided to the reader, with a more detailed explanation of WO 3 material applied in sensing devices.