Effects of GABA<sub>A</sub> kinetics on cortical population activity: computational studies and physiological confirmations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Voltage-sensitive dye (VSD) imaging produces an unprecedented real-time and high-resolution mesoscopic signal to measure the cortical population activity. We have previously shown that the neuronal compartments contributions to the signal are dynamic and stimulus-dependent (Chemla S, Chavane F. Neuroimage 53: 420-438, 2010). Moreover, the VSD signal can also be strongly affected by the network state, such as in anesthetized vs. awake preparations. Here, we investigated the impact of the network state, through GABAA receptors modulation, on the VSD signal using a computational approach. We therefore systematically measured the effect of the GABAA-mediated inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs) decay time constant (τG) on our modeled VSD response to an input stimulus of increasing strength. Our simulations suggest that τG strongly modulates the dynamics of the VSD signal, affecting the amplitude, input response function, and the transient balance of excitation and inhibition. We confirmed these predictions experimentally on awake and anesthetized monkeys, comparing VSD responses to drifting gratings stimuli of various contrasts. Lastly, one in vitro study has suggested that GABAA receptors may also be directly affected by the VSDs themselves (Mennerick S, Chisari M, Shu H, Taylor A, Vasek M, Eisenman L, Zorumski C. J Neurosci 30: 2871-2879, 2010). Our modeling approach suggests that the type of modulation described in this study would actually have a negligible influence on the population response. This study highlights that functional results acquired with different techniques and network states must be compared with caution. Biophysical models are proposed here as an adequate tool to delineate the domain of VSD data interpretation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".