2010
DOI: 10.1523/jneurosci.3635-09.2010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effect of Spatially Inhomogeneous Extracellular Electric Fields on Neurons

Abstract: The cooperative action of neurons and glia generates electrical fields, but their effect on individual neurons via ephaptic interactions is mostly unknown. Here, we analyze the impact of spatially inhomogeneous electric fields on the membrane potential, the induced membrane field, and the induced current source density of one-dimensional cables as well as morphologically realistic neurons and discuss how the features of the extracellular field affect these quantities. We show through simulations that endogenou… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
162
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 180 publications
(170 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
(87 reference statements)
8
162
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, similar to several previous studies (7,8), our model assumes a homogenous and resistive extracellular field in arriving at the local field potentials. Although biophysical and experimental studies point to nonresistive components and nonhomogeneities in the extracellular fields, the impacts of these nonhomogeneities and nonresistive components are largely confined to higher frequencies (54)(55)(56). From these analyses, it stands to reason that the resistive and homogeneity assumptions are not debilitating for the conclusions drawn in our study where the range of frequencies is much lower, in the theta range.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…First, similar to several previous studies (7,8), our model assumes a homogenous and resistive extracellular field in arriving at the local field potentials. Although biophysical and experimental studies point to nonresistive components and nonhomogeneities in the extracellular fields, the impacts of these nonhomogeneities and nonresistive components are largely confined to higher frequencies (54)(55)(56). From these analyses, it stands to reason that the resistive and homogeneity assumptions are not debilitating for the conclusions drawn in our study where the range of frequencies is much lower, in the theta range.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…2C,D, 3, 4C-H ). Thus, by reducing the trial-to-trial variability of oscillatory phase rapidly following fixation onset, field potentials can lead to greater spiketiming reliability and consequently improve signal propagation (Azouz and Gray, 1999;Anastassiou et al, 2010Anastassiou et al, , 2011Fröhlich and McCormick, 2010;Ozen et al, 2010), as well as influence synaptic strength (Lubenov and Siapas, 2008;Masquelier et al, 2009Masquelier et al, , 2011Deco et al, 2011). The alpha band spike-phase locking was the weakest and least frequent, allowing a greater bandwidth for putative spike-phase coding in this lower frequency range (Fell and Axmacher, 2011).…”
Section: Modulation Of Spike Probability By Field Potential Phasementioning
confidence: 99%
“…4B) is far below the reported threshold for directly evoking action potentials in pharmacologically isolated cells (Radman et al 2009). This suggests network mechanisms are involved such as an elevation of spontaneous firing rate or a modulation of spike timing distributed across many cells (Anastassiou et al 2010;Radman et al 2007;Reato et al 2010).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%