Regulation of spike timing in visual cortical circuits

Abstract

A train of action potentials (a spike train) can carry information in both the average firing rate and the pattern of spikes in the train. But can such a spike-pattern code be supported by cortical circuits? Neurons in vitro produce a spike pattern in response to the injection of a fluctuating current. However, cortical neurons in vivo are modulated by local oscillatory neuronal activity and by top-down inputs. In a cortical circuit, precise spike patterns thus reflect the interaction between internally generated activity and sensory information encoded by input spike trains. We review the evidence for precise and reliable spike timing in the cortex and discuss its computational role.Reliability and precision are two different quantities. When you make an appointment with your friend, she can either keep the appointment or not show up at all. If she does show up, she might or might not be on time. The former uncertainty is related to reliability, whereas the latter is related to precision. When the same stimulus waveform is repeatedly injected at the soma of a neuron in vitro (FIG. 1a), a similar spike train is obtained on each trial 1,2 (FIG. 1b). When approximately the same number of spikes occur on each trial the neuron is said to be reliable, whereas when the spikes occur almost at the same time across trials it is said to be precise (FIG. 1c). For a single neuron, the potential information content of precise and reliable spike times is many times larger than that which is contained in the firing rate, which is averaged across a typical interval of a hundred milliseconds [3][4][5][6] . The information contained in spike timing is available immediately, rather than after an averaging period. Furthermore, the timing of patterns of spikes can potentially transmit even more information than the timing of the individual constituent spikes 3,7 . The potential relevance of spike patterns becomes apparent when we consider neurons at the population level: when a group of similar neurons (a 'pool') produces precise and reliable spike trains, the neurons they project to receive volleys of synchronous spikes 8,9 . This opens up the possibility of communicating between different cortical areas through synchronous spike volleys.In contrast to the in vitro situation described above, in the intact cortex most excitatory synaptic inputs arrive at the dendrites rather than at the soma (FIG. 1d), and synaptic transmission is typically unreliable [10][11][12][13] . Furthermore, most of these dendritic inputs are not directly related to ongoing sensory stimulation; rather, they reflect spatiotemporally structured internal activity. Therefore, when the same stimulus is presented repeatedly, the resulting spike trains are usually neither precise nor reliable when they are aligned to the stimulus onset 6 . Instead, HHMI Author ManuscriptHHMI Author Manuscript HHMI Author Manuscript neural activity in vivo might be dominated by internally generated complex reverberations or rhythmic oscillations, and precise and reliable sp...

On the functions, mechanisms, and malfunctions of intracortical contextual modulation

“…Furthermore, in addition to any role that it has in grouping, attention may also affect amplification and suppression via its effect on the synchrony of inhibitory interneuron activities. Computational modelling suggests that interneuron synchrony could affect the slope of the function relating the postsynaptic neuron's output to its RF input (Tiesinga, Fellous and Sejnowski, 2008). This could mediate the changes in firing rate that are seen in conjunction with selective attention, and this form of gain modulation increases or decreases the overall strength of the neuron's response while preserving RF stimulus specificity.…”

Compensating time delays with neural predictions: are predictions sensory or motor?

“…However, over the past many decades, alternative schemes have been developed in which time is the medium in which coding of information takes place (Bialek & Rieke 1992;Hopfield 1995;Singer & Gray 1995;Johansson & Birznieks 2004;VanRullen et al 2005;Tiesinga et al 2008). A main feature of the temporal coding schemes is time delays, which typically arise owing to the natural time dependence of the stimuli, but can be actively introduced by the encoding scheme (Hopfield 1995).…”

“…The input from various sources arriving at HD neurons is delayed, which implies that, if a rat's head is moving continuously to the right (say), the sensed head direction should trail behind (shifted to the left) in relation to the actual instantaneous head direction (van der Meer et al 2007). It has been found, however, that neurons in the PSC represent the current (as opposed to a lagging) position of the head with close to 0-lag.…”

Dynamic Coordination in Brain and Mind

“…In part this depends upon how synchronized the inhibitory inputs are, because when they are synchronized so are the periods of recovery from inhibition. Models of gain modulation through synchronized disinhibition show that it could play a major role in attention, coordinate transformation, the perceptual constancies, and many other cases of contextual disambiguation (Salinas and Sejnowski 2001;Tiesinga, Fellous, and Sejnowski 2008). These models show that such gain modulation is particularly effective at gamma frequencies.…”

“…The point is that these effects preserve local selectivity. This obviously applies to dynamic grouping, linking, and routing, and in relation to contextual disambiguation by gain modulation Tiesinga, Fellous, and Sejnowski (2008) say "Multiplicative gain modulation is important because it increases or decreases the overall strength of the neuron"s response while preserving the stimulus preference of the neuron" (page 106).…”