changes in notes thesis
This commit is contained in:
a.ott
parent
45aa212b8a
commit
a8ce30d92b
@ -20,25 +20,29 @@
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\select@language{english}}
|
||||
\@writefile{lof}{\select@language{english}}
|
||||
\@writefile{lot}{\select@language{english}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {1}Abstract}{2}{section.1}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2}Introduction}{2}{section.2}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {3}Materials and Methods}{3}{section.3}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.1}Notes:}{3}{subsection.3.1}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.2}Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{3}{subsection.3.2}}
|
||||
\newlabel{basic_voltage_dynamics}{{1}{4}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.3.1}{}}
|
||||
\newlabel{currents_lifac}{{2}{4}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.3.2}{}}
|
||||
\newlabel{Adaption_dynamics}{{3}{4}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.3.3}{}}
|
||||
\newlabel{full_voltage_dynamics}{{4}{4}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.3.4}{}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.3}Data Generation}{4}{subsection.3.3}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.4}Stimulus Protocols}{4}{subsection.3.4}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.5}Fitting of the Model}{4}{subsection.3.5}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.6}Henriette's structure:}{4}{subsection.3.6}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {4}Results}{5}{section.4}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {5}Discussion}{5}{section.5}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {6}Possible Sources}{5}{section.6}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {6.1}Henriette Walz - Thesis}{5}{subsection.6.1}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {6.1.1}Nervous system - Signal encoding}{5}{subsubsection.6.1.1}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {6.1.2}electrosensory system - electric fish}{6}{subsubsection.6.1.2}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {6.1.3}P-Units encoding}{7}{subsubsection.6.1.3}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {6.1.4}Chapter 4 - other models}{8}{subsubsection.6.1.4}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {6.2}Zakon: Negative Interspike Interval Correlations Increase the Neuronal Capacity for Encoding Time-Dependent Stimuli}{8}{subsection.6.2}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {1}Zusammenfassung}{3}{section.1}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2}Abstract}{3}{section.2}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {3}Introduction}{3}{section.3}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {4}Materials and Methods}{3}{section.4}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.1}Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{3}{subsection.4.1}}
|
||||
\newlabel{basic_voltage_dynamics}{{1}{3}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.4.1}{}}
|
||||
\newlabel{currents_lifac}{{2}{3}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.4.2}{}}
|
||||
\newlabel{Adaption_dynamics}{{3}{3}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.4.3}{}}
|
||||
\newlabel{full_voltage_dynamics}{{4}{3}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.4.4}{}}
|
||||
\newlabel{fig:model_comparison}{{4.1}{4}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.4.4}{}}
|
||||
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {1}{\ignorespaces Comparison of different simple models normed to a baseline fire rate of ~10 Hz stimulated with a step stimulus. In the left column y-axis in mV in the right column the y-axis shows the frequency in Hz. PIF: Shows a continuously increasing membrane voltage with a fixed slope and as such constant frequency for a given stimulus strength. LIF: Approaches a stimulus dependent membrane voltage steady state exponentially Also has constant frequency for a fixed stimulus value. LIFAC: Exponentially approaches its new membrane voltage value but also shows adaption after changes in the stimulus the frequency takes some time to adapt and arrive at the new stable value. LIFAC + ref: Very similar to LIFAC the added absolute refractory period keeps the voltage constant for a short time after the spike and limits high fire rates. {\color {red}(TODO: how to deal with the parameters) } }}{4}{figure.1}}
|
||||
\citation{walz2013Phd}
|
||||
\citation{todd1999identification}
|
||||
\newlabel{fig:stim_development}{{4.1}{5}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{figure.1}{}}
|
||||
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {2}{\ignorespaces }}{5}{figure.2}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.2}Cell recordings}{5}{subsection.4.2}}
|
||||
\bibdata{citations}
|
||||
\bibcite{todd1999identification}{{1}{1999}{{Todd and Andrews}}{{}}}
|
||||
\bibcite{walz2013Phd}{{2}{2013}{{Walz}}{{}}}
|
||||
\bibstyle{apalike}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.3}Stimulus Protocols}{6}{subsection.4.3}}
|
||||
\newlabel{fig:stim_examples}{{4.3}{6}{Stimulus Protocols}{subsection.4.3}{}}
|
||||
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {3}{\ignorespaces }}{6}{figure.3}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.4}Fitting of the Model}{6}{subsection.4.4}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {5}Results}{6}{section.5}}
|
||||
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {6}Discussion}{6}{section.6}}
|
||||
|
||||
14
thesis/Masterthesis.bbl
Normal file
14
thesis/Masterthesis.bbl
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
|
||||
\begin{thebibliography}{}
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Todd and Andrews, 1999]{todd1999identification}
|
||||
Todd, B.~S. and Andrews, D.~C. (1999).
|
||||
\newblock The identification of peaks in physiological signals.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Computers and biomedical research}, 32(4):322--335.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Walz, 2013]{walz2013Phd}
|
||||
Walz, H. (2013).
|
||||
\newblock {\em Encoding of Communication Signals in Heterogeneous Populations
|
||||
ofElectroreceptors}.
|
||||
\newblock PhD thesis, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.
|
||||
|
||||
\end{thebibliography}
|
||||
46
thesis/Masterthesis.blg
Normal file
46
thesis/Masterthesis.blg
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
|
||||
This is BibTeX, Version 0.99d (TeX Live 2015/Debian)
|
||||
Capacity: max_strings=35307, hash_size=35307, hash_prime=30011
|
||||
The top-level auxiliary file: Masterthesis.aux
|
||||
The style file: apalike.bst
|
||||
Database file #1: citations.bib
|
||||
You've used 2 entries,
|
||||
1935 wiz_defined-function locations,
|
||||
485 strings with 4006 characters,
|
||||
and the built_in function-call counts, 688 in all, are:
|
||||
= -- 69
|
||||
> -- 20
|
||||
< -- 2
|
||||
+ -- 8
|
||||
- -- 6
|
||||
* -- 55
|
||||
:= -- 128
|
||||
add.period$ -- 6
|
||||
call.type$ -- 2
|
||||
change.case$ -- 12
|
||||
chr.to.int$ -- 2
|
||||
cite$ -- 2
|
||||
duplicate$ -- 26
|
||||
empty$ -- 48
|
||||
format.name$ -- 10
|
||||
if$ -- 128
|
||||
int.to.chr$ -- 1
|
||||
int.to.str$ -- 0
|
||||
missing$ -- 1
|
||||
newline$ -- 13
|
||||
num.names$ -- 6
|
||||
pop$ -- 8
|
||||
preamble$ -- 1
|
||||
purify$ -- 13
|
||||
quote$ -- 0
|
||||
skip$ -- 22
|
||||
stack$ -- 0
|
||||
substring$ -- 51
|
||||
swap$ -- 2
|
||||
text.length$ -- 0
|
||||
text.prefix$ -- 0
|
||||
top$ -- 0
|
||||
type$ -- 12
|
||||
warning$ -- 0
|
||||
while$ -- 6
|
||||
width$ -- 0
|
||||
write$ -- 28
|
||||
@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
||||
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.16 (TeX Live 2015/Debian) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2018.11.12) 14 JUL 2020 15:39
|
||||
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.16 (TeX Live 2015/Debian) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2018.11.12) 19 AUG 2020 15:03
|
||||
entering extended mode
|
||||
restricted \write18 enabled.
|
||||
%&-line parsing enabled.
|
||||
@ -499,53 +499,66 @@ l.73 \newpage
|
||||
\tf@toc=\write4
|
||||
\openout4 = `Masterthesis.toc'.
|
||||
|
||||
[2] [3]
|
||||
[2]
|
||||
<figures/model_comparison.pdf, id=74, 578.16pt x 578.16pt>
|
||||
File: figures/model_comparison.pdf Graphic file (type pdf)
|
||||
|
||||
<use figures/model_comparison.pdf>
|
||||
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/model_comparison.pdf used on input line 156.
|
||||
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 346.89867pt x 346.89867pt.
|
||||
[3]
|
||||
<figures/stimulus_development.pdf, id=87, 433.62pt x 433.62pt>
|
||||
File: figures/stimulus_development.pdf Graphic file (type pdf)
|
||||
|
||||
<use figures/stimulus_development.pdf>
|
||||
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/stimulus_development.pdf used on input line 16
|
||||
5.
|
||||
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 260.17401pt x 260.17401pt.
|
||||
[4 <./figures/model_comparison.pdf>]
|
||||
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/ucs/data/uni-32.def
|
||||
File: uni-32.def 2013/05/13 UCS: Unicode data U+2000..U+20FF
|
||||
) [4] [5] [6]
|
||||
)
|
||||
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/ucs/data/uni-34.def
|
||||
File: uni-34.def 2013/05/13 UCS: Unicode data U+2200..U+22FF
|
||||
) [7]
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `BeforeClearDocument' on input line 383.
|
||||
[8]
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `AfterLastShipout' on input line 383.
|
||||
|
||||
(./Masterthesis.aux)
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtVeryEndDocument' on input line 383.
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtEndAfterFileList' on input line 383.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Package rerunfilecheck Warning: File `Masterthesis.out' has changed.
|
||||
(rerunfilecheck) Rerun to get outlines right
|
||||
(rerunfilecheck) or use package `bookmark'.
|
||||
|
||||
Package rerunfilecheck Info: Checksums for `Masterthesis.out':
|
||||
(rerunfilecheck) Before: E5A01AD1DD40BB8E82354B986D49E92E;1097
|
||||
(rerunfilecheck) After: B518E8D1F778500C8E13AC0FC596ED6A;1261.
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `AtVeryVeryEnd' on input line 383.
|
||||
) [5 <./figures/stimulus_development.pdf>]
|
||||
<figures/stimuliExamples.pdf, id=184, 462.52798pt x 346.89601pt>
|
||||
File: figures/stimuliExamples.pdf Graphic file (type pdf)
|
||||
|
||||
<use figures/stimuliExamples.pdf>
|
||||
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/stimuliExamples.pdf used on input line 194.
|
||||
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 277.51892pt x 208.1392pt.
|
||||
(./Masterthesis.bbl)
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `BeforeClearDocument' on input line 219.
|
||||
[6 <./figures/stimuliExamples.pdf>]
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `AfterLastShipout' on input line 219.
|
||||
(./Masterthesis.aux)
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtVeryEndDocument' on input line 219.
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtEndAfterFileList' on input line 219.
|
||||
Package rerunfilecheck Info: File `Masterthesis.out' has not changed.
|
||||
(rerunfilecheck) Checksum: B04264CBCFACBF6AD8E885DFBDF2C700;553.
|
||||
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `AtVeryVeryEnd' on input line 219.
|
||||
)
|
||||
Here is how much of TeX's memory you used:
|
||||
11043 strings out of 493029
|
||||
156320 string characters out of 6136233
|
||||
259783 words of memory out of 5000000
|
||||
14355 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+600000
|
||||
10992 strings out of 493029
|
||||
156478 string characters out of 6136233
|
||||
259995 words of memory out of 5000000
|
||||
14380 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+600000
|
||||
9214 words of font info for 33 fonts, out of 8000000 for 9000
|
||||
1141 hyphenation exceptions out of 8191
|
||||
37i,11n,38p,618b,561s stack positions out of 5000i,500n,10000p,200000b,80000s
|
||||
37i,11n,38p,1009b,551s stack positions out of 5000i,500n,10000p,200000b,80000s
|
||||
</usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmbx12.pfb></us
|
||||
r/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmex10.pfb></usr/shar
|
||||
e/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmmi12.pfb></usr/share/texl
|
||||
ive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmmi8.pfb></usr/share/texlive/tex
|
||||
mf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmr12.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist
|
||||
/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmr17.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/
|
||||
type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmr8.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/pu
|
||||
blic/amsfonts/cm/cmsy10.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/a
|
||||
msfonts/cm/cmsy8.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts
|
||||
/cm/cmti12.pfb>
|
||||
Output written on Masterthesis.pdf (9 pages, 131291 bytes).
|
||||
type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmsy10.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/
|
||||
public/amsfonts/cm/cmsy8.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/
|
||||
amsfonts/cm/cmti12.pfb>
|
||||
Output written on Masterthesis.pdf (7 pages, 189235 bytes).
|
||||
PDF statistics:
|
||||
286 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607)
|
||||
262 compressed objects within 3 object streams
|
||||
112 named destinations out of 1000 (max. 500000)
|
||||
137 words of extra memory for PDF output out of 10000 (max. 10000000)
|
||||
259 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607)
|
||||
149 compressed objects within 2 object streams
|
||||
29 named destinations out of 1000 (max. 500000)
|
||||
96 words of extra memory for PDF output out of 10000 (max. 10000000)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@ -1,18 +1,10 @@
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.1}{Abstract}{}% 1
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.2}{Introduction}{}% 2
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.3}{Materials and Methods}{}% 3
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.3.1}{Notes:}{section.3}% 4
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.3.2}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{section.3}% 5
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.3.3}{Data Generation}{section.3}% 6
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.3.4}{Stimulus Protocols}{section.3}% 7
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.3.5}{Fitting of the Model}{section.3}% 8
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.3.6}{Henriette's structure:}{section.3}% 9
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.4}{Results}{}% 10
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.5}{Discussion}{}% 11
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.6}{Possible Sources}{}% 12
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.6.1}{Henriette Walz - Thesis}{section.6}% 13
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [3][]{subsubsection.6.1.1}{Nervous system - Signal encoding}{subsection.6.1}% 14
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [3][]{subsubsection.6.1.2}{electrosensory system - electric fish}{subsection.6.1}% 15
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [3][]{subsubsection.6.1.3}{P-Units encoding}{subsection.6.1}% 16
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [3][]{subsubsection.6.1.4}{Chapter 4 - other models}{subsection.6.1}% 17
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.6.2}{Zakon: Negative Interspike Interval Correlations Increase the Neuronal Capacity for Encoding Time-Dependent Stimuli}{section.6}% 18
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.1}{Zusammenfassung}{}% 1
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.2}{Abstract}{}% 2
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.3}{Introduction}{}% 3
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.4}{Materials and Methods}{}% 4
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.4.1}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{section.4}% 5
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.4.2}{Cell recordings}{section.4}% 6
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.4.3}{Stimulus Protocols}{section.4}% 7
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [2][]{subsection.4.4}{Fitting of the Model}{section.4}% 8
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.5}{Results}{}% 9
|
||||
\BOOKMARK [1][]{section.6}{Discussion}{}% 10
|
||||
|
||||
Binary file not shown.
Binary file not shown.
@ -14,8 +14,8 @@
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\newcommand{\todo}[1]{{(\color{red} TODO: #1) }}
|
||||
\newcommand{\AptLepto}{{\textit{Apteronotus leptorhynchus}}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\todo}[1]{{\color{red}(TODO: #1) }}
|
||||
\newcommand{\AptLepto}{{\textit{Apteronotus leptorhynchus \:}}}
|
||||
\newcommand{\lepto}{{\textit{A. leptorhynchus}}}
|
||||
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
@ -29,13 +29,13 @@
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
\begin{titlepage}
|
||||
\begin{center}
|
||||
{\Huge TITEL \par}
|
||||
{\Huge Modeling the Heterogeneity of Electrosensory Afferents in Electric Fish \par}
|
||||
\vspace{0.75cm}
|
||||
{\Large Masterthesis \par}
|
||||
\vspace{0.25cm}
|
||||
{der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät \par} {der Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen \par}
|
||||
\vspace{0.75cm}
|
||||
{Erstkorrektor: \\
|
||||
{Erstkorrektor: Prof.~Dr.~Philipp Berens\\
|
||||
Zweitkorrektor: Prof.~Dr.~Jan Benda \par}
|
||||
\vspace{0.25cm}
|
||||
{Lehrbereich für Neuroethologie}
|
||||
@ -43,7 +43,7 @@
|
||||
\vfill
|
||||
\large vorgelegt von \par
|
||||
\large Alexander Mathias Ott \par
|
||||
Abgabedatum: 30.11.2017
|
||||
Abgabedatum: 21.09.2020
|
||||
\end{center}
|
||||
\end{titlepage}
|
||||
|
||||
@ -83,11 +83,17 @@ Außerdem erkläre ich, dass die eingereichte Arbeit weder vollständig noch in
|
||||
\tableofcontents
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
\newpage
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
% Zusammenfassung
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
\section{Zusammenfassung}
|
||||
% Abstract in deutsch
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Abstract}
|
||||
%Einleitung + Ergebnisse der Diskussion in kurz
|
||||
|
||||
@ -98,81 +104,24 @@ Außerdem erkläre ich, dass die eingereichte Arbeit weder vollständig noch in
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
\section{Introduction}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item electric fish
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item general: habitat,
|
||||
\item as model animal for ethology
|
||||
\item electric organ + eod
|
||||
\item sensory neurons p- and t(?)-type
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\item sensory perception
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item receptor -> heterogenic population
|
||||
\item further analysis limited by what receptors code for - P-Units encoding
|
||||
\item p-type neurons code AMs
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item goal be able to simulate heterogenic population to analyze full coding properties -> many cells at the same time needed -> only possible in vitro/ with model simulations
|
||||
|
||||
\item Possible to draw representative values for model parameters to generate a population ?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
% Methoden
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
\section{Materials and Methods}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Notes:}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item Data generation
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item How data was measured / which data used
|
||||
\item How data was chosen -> at least 30s baseline, 7 contrasts with 7 trials
|
||||
\item experimental protocols were allowed by XYZ (before 2012: All experimental protocols were approved and complied with national and regional laws (file no. 55.2-1-54-2531-135-09). between 2013-2016 ZP 1/13 Regierungspräsidium Tübingen and after 2016 ZP 1/16 Regierungspräsidium Tübingen)
|
||||
\item description of data -> Baseline properties, FI-Curve with images made from cells
|
||||
\item make a point of using also bursty cells as part of what is new in this work!
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item behavior parameters:
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item which behaviors were looked at / calculated and why (bf, vs, sc, cv, fi-curve...)
|
||||
\item how exactly were they calculated in the cell and model
|
||||
\item stimulus protocols
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item Construction of model
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item Explain general LIF
|
||||
\item parameters explanation, dif. equations
|
||||
\item Explain addition of adaption current
|
||||
\item note addition of noise + factor for the independence from step size
|
||||
\item addition of refractory period
|
||||
\item check between alpha in fire-rate model adaption and a-delta in LIFAC
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item Fitting of model to data
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item which variables where determined beforehand (None, just for start parameters)
|
||||
\item which variables where fit
|
||||
\item What method was used (Nelder-Mead) and why/(how it works?)
|
||||
\item fit routine ? (currently just all at the same time)
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}
|
||||
|
||||
% add info about simulation by euler integration and which time steps!
|
||||
% show voltage dynamics with resistance :
|
||||
also show function with membrane resistance before explaining that is is unknown an left out: $ \tau_m \frac{dV}{dt} = -V + I$
|
||||
also show function with membrane resistance before explaining that is unknown and left out: $ \tau_m \frac{dV}{dt} = -V + I$
|
||||
% explain subthreshold behaviour first then add V_{th} and adaption etc
|
||||
% explain modeling of the adaption current see Benda2010
|
||||
% table with explanation of variables ?
|
||||
\todo{restructure sounds horrible}
|
||||
\todo{restructure and rewrite sounds horrible}
|
||||
|
||||
The P-units were modeled with an noisy leaky integrate-and-fire neuron with an adaption current (LIFAC). The basic voltage dynamics in this model follows equation \ref{basic_voltage_dynamics}. The voltage is integrated over time while also exponentially decaying back to zero. When a voltage threshold is reached the voltage is set back to zero and a spike is recorded. The currents in this model carry the unit mV as the the cell bodies of p-units are inaccessible during the recordings and as such the resistance of the cell membrane is unknown \todo{ref mem res p-units}.
|
||||
|
||||
@ -203,181 +152,68 @@ Finally a noise current and an absolute refractory period where added to the mod
|
||||
\label{full_voltage_dynamics}
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}[H]
|
||||
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figures/model_comparison.pdf}
|
||||
\label{fig:model_comparison}
|
||||
\caption{Comparison of different simple models normed to a baseline fire rate of ~10 Hz stimulated with a step stimulus. In the left column y-axis in mV in the right column the y-axis shows the frequency in Hz. PIF: Shows a continuously increasing membrane voltage with a fixed slope and as such constant frequency for a given stimulus strength. LIF: Approaches a stimulus dependent membrane voltage steady state exponentially Also has constant frequency for a fixed stimulus value. LIFAC: Exponentially approaches its new membrane voltage value but also shows adaption after changes in the stimulus the frequency takes some time to adapt and arrive at the new stable value. LIFAC + ref: Very similar to LIFAC the added absolute refractory period keeps the voltage constant for a short time after the spike and limits high fire rates. \todo{how to deal with the parameters} }
|
||||
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Data Generation}
|
||||
|
||||
The data for this master's thesis was collected as part of other previous studies \todo{ref other studies}. The collection method provided here is only an overview for the exact details see \todo{link papers}.
|
||||
The in vivo intracellular recordings of P-unit electroreceptors of \AptLepto were done in the lateral line nerve . The fish were an anesthetized with MS-222 (100-130 mg/l; PharmaQ; Fordingbridge, UK) and the part of the skin covering the lateral line just behind the skull was removed
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}[H]
|
||||
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figures/stimulus_development.pdf}
|
||||
\label{fig:stim_development}
|
||||
\caption{}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
general anesthetic MS-222 (100-130 mg/l; PharmaQ; Fordingbridge, UK)
|
||||
local anesthetics Lidocaine (2\%; bela-pharm; Vechta, Germany)
|
||||
immobilization with (Tubocurarine; Sigma-Aldrich; Steinheim, Germany, 25–50 $\mu l$ of 5\. mg/ml solution)
|
||||
\subsection{Cell recordings}
|
||||
|
||||
The cell recordings for this master thesis were collected as part of other previous studies \cite{walz2013Phd}\todo{ref other studies} and is described there but will also be repeated below . The data of \todo{how many} \AptLepto were used. \todo{sizes range, EOD range, number of cells}
|
||||
The in vivo intracellular recordings of P-unit electroreceptors were done in the lateral line nerve . The fish were anesthetized with MS-222 (100-130 mg/l; PharmaQ; Fordingbridge, UK) and the part of the skin covering the lateral line just behind the skull was removed, while the area was anesthetized with Lidocaine (2\%; bela-pharm; Vechta, Germany). The fish were immobilized for the recordings with Tubocurarine (Sigma-Aldrich; Steinheim, Germany, 25–50 $\mu l$ of 5\. mg/ml solution) and placed in the experimental tank (47 $\times$ 42 $\times$ 12\,cm) filled with water from the fish's home tank with a conductivity of about 300$\mu$\,S/cm and the temperature was around 28°C.
|
||||
All experimental protocels were approved and complied with national and regional laws (files no. 55.2-1-54-2531-135-09, no. and no. \todo{andere antrags nummern} )
|
||||
For the recordings a standard glass mircoelectrode (borosilicate; 1.5 mm outer diameter; GB150F-8P, Science Products, Hofheim, Germany) was used, pulled to a resistance of 50-100M$\Omega$ using Model P-97 from Sutter Instrument Co. (No-
|
||||
vato, CA, USA). They were filled with 1M KCl solution. The electrodes were controlled using microdrives (Luigs-Neumann; Ratingen, Germany) and the potentials recorded with the bridge mode of the SEC-05 amplifier (npi-electronics GmbH, Tamm, Germany) and lowpass filtered at 10 kHz.
|
||||
During the recording spikes were detected online using the peak detection algorithm from \cite{todd1999identification}. It uses a dynamically adjusted threshold value above the previously detected trough. To detect spikes through changes in amplitude the threshold was set to 50\% of the amplitude of a detected spike while keeping the threshold above a minimum set to be higher than the noise level based on a histogram of all peak amplitudes. Trials with bad spike detection were removed from further analysis.
|
||||
The fish's EOD was recorded using using two vertical carbon rods (11\,cm long, 8\,mm diameter) positioned in front of the head and behind its tail.. the signal was amplified 200 to 500 times and band-pass filtered (3 − 1500 Hz passband, DPA2-FX, npi-electronics, Tamm, Germany). The electrodes were placed on isopotential lines of the stimulus field to reduce the interference of the stimulus in the recording. All signals were digitized using a data acquisition board (PCI-6229; National Instruments, Austin TX, USA) at a sampling rate of \todo{Hz range} kHz
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Stimulus Protocols}
|
||||
% image of Baseline stimulus as baseline doesn't mean no stimulus here
|
||||
% image of Fi curve stimulus sinusoidal step
|
||||
% image of SAM stimulus
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Fitting of the Model}
|
||||
The recording and stimulation was done using the ephys, efield, and efish plugins of the software RELACS (\href{www.relacs.net}{www.relacs.net}). It allowed the online spike and EOD detection, pre-analysis and visualization and ran on a Debian computer.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Henriette's structure:}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item data generation - recordings
|
||||
\item model simulations - construction of model
|
||||
\item Simulation protocols
|
||||
\item Data analysis - calculation of behavior parameters
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item calculation of baseline parameters
|
||||
\item calculation of fi curve parameters
|
||||
\item stimuli step SAM(?) noise(?)
|
||||
\item goodness of fit
|
||||
\item sensitivity analysis (influence of par on model)
|
||||
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\subsection{Stimulus Protocols}
|
||||
% image of Baseline stimulus as baseline doesn't mean no stimulus here
|
||||
% image of Fi curve stimulus sinusoidal step
|
||||
% image of SAM stimulus
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}[H]
|
||||
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figures/stimuliExamples.pdf}
|
||||
\label{fig:stim_examples}
|
||||
\caption{}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Results}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item how well does the fitting work?
|
||||
|
||||
\item distribution of behavior parameters (cells and models)
|
||||
\subsection{Fitting of the Model}
|
||||
|
||||
\item distributions of parameters
|
||||
|
||||
\item correlations: between parameters between parameters and behavior
|
||||
|
||||
\item correlation between final error and behavior parameters of the cell -> hard to fit cell types
|
||||
\section{Results}
|
||||
|
||||
\item (response to SAM stimuli)
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Discussion}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Possible Sources}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Henriette Walz - Thesis}
|
||||
\subsubsection{Nervous system - Signal encoding}
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item single neurons are the building blocks of the nervous system (Cajal 1899)
|
||||
\item encoding of information in spike frequency - rate code(first description(?) Adrian 1928) also find examples! (light flash intensity Barlow et al. 1971, )
|
||||
\item encoding info in inter spike intervals (Singer and Gary 1995)
|
||||
\item encoding time window (Theunissen and Miller 1995) "This time window is the time scale in which the encoding is assumed to take placewithin the nervous system
|
||||
\item encoding is noisy (Mainen and Sejnowski 1995, Tolhurst et al 1983, Tomko and Crapper 1974 -> review Faisal et al 2008) in part because of stimulus properties but also cell properties (Ion channel stochasticity (van Rossum et al.,2003))
|
||||
\item noise can be beneficial to encoding -> "stochastic resonance" (weak stimuli on thresholding devices like neurons, noise allows coding of sub threshold stimuli) (Benzi et al., 1981)
|
||||
\item single neurons are anatomically and computationally independent units, the
|
||||
representation and processing of information in vertebrate nervous systems is distributed
|
||||
over groups or networks of cells (for a review, see Pouget et al., 2000)
|
||||
\item It has
|
||||
been shown that the synchrony among cells carries information on a very fine temporal
|
||||
scale in different modalities, from olfaction (Laurent, 1996) to vision (Dan et al., 1998)
|
||||
\item In the electrosensory system it was shown before that communication signals change the synchrony of the receptor population (Benda et al., 2005, 2006)
|
||||
and that this is read out by cells in the successive stages of the electrosensory pathway
|
||||
(Marsat and Maler, 2010, 2012; Marsat et al., 2009).
|
||||
\item An advantage of rate coding in populations is that it is fast. The rate in
|
||||
single neurons has to be averaged over a time window, that is at least as long as the
|
||||
minimum interspike interval. In contrast, the population rate can follow the stimulus
|
||||
instantaneous, as it does not have to be averaged over time but can be averaged over
|
||||
cells (Knight, 1972a).
|
||||
\item In a population of neurons subject to neuronal noise, stochastic resonance occurs
|
||||
even if the stimulus is strong enough to trigger action potentials itself (supra-threshold
|
||||
stochastic resonance described by Stocks, 2000; see Fig. 1.1 B
|
||||
\item Cells of the same type and from the same population often vary in their stimulus sen-
|
||||
sitivity (Ringach et al., 2002) as well as in their baseline activity properties (Gussin et al., 2007; Hospedales et al., 2008)
|
||||
\item Heterogeneity has been shown to improve information coding in both situations, in the presence of noise correlations, for example in
|
||||
the visual system cells (Chelaru and Dragoi, 2008) or when correlations mainly originate
|
||||
from shared input as in the olfactory system (Padmanabhan and Urban, 2010)
|
||||
\item A prerequisite to a neural code thus is that it can be read out by other neurons (Perkel
|
||||
and Bullock, 1968).
|
||||
\item Development and evolution shape the functioning of many physiological systems and there is evidence that they also shape the encoding mechanisms of nervous systems. For example, the development of frequency
|
||||
selectivity in the auditory cortex has been shown to be delayed in animals stimulated
|
||||
with white noise only (Chang and Merzenich, 2003). Also, several encoding mechanisms can be related to the selective pressure that the energetic consumption of the nervous system has exerted on its evolution (Laughlin, 2001; Niven and Laughlin, 2008).
|
||||
These finding conformed earlier theoretical predictions that had proposed that coding
|
||||
should be optimized to encode natural stimuli in an energy-efficient way (Barlow, 1972). -> importance of using natural stimuli as the coding and nervous system could be optimized for unknown stimuli features not contained in the artificial stimuli like white noise.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\subsubsection{electrosensory system - electric fish}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item For decades, studies examining the neurophysiological systems of weakly electric
|
||||
fish have provided insights into how natural behaviors are generated using relatively
|
||||
simple sensorimotor circuits (for recent reviews see: Chacron et al., 2011; Fortune, 2006;
|
||||
Marsat and Maler, 2012). Further, electrocommunication signals are relatively easy to
|
||||
describe, classify and simulate, facilitating quantification and experimental manipulation. Weakly electric fish are therefore an ideal system for examining how communication signals influence sensory scenes, drive sensory system responses, and consequently
|
||||
exert effects on conspecific behavior.
|
||||
\item The weakly electric fish use active electroreception to navigate and communicate under
|
||||
low light conditions (Zupanc et al., 2001).
|
||||
\item In active electroreception, animals produce
|
||||
an electric field using and electric organ (and this electric field is therefore called the
|
||||
electric organ discharge, EOD) and infer, from changes of the EOD, information about
|
||||
the location and identification of objects and conspecifics in their vicinity (e.g. Kelly
|
||||
et al., 2008; MacIver et al., 2001). However, perturbations result not only from objects
|
||||
and other fish, but also from self-motion and other factors. All of these together make
|
||||
up the electrosensory scene. The perturbed version of the fish's own field on its skin
|
||||
is called the electric image (Caputi and Budelli, 2006), which is sensed via specialized
|
||||
receptors distributed over the body surface (Carr et al., 1982).
|
||||
\item In A. leptorhynchus, the
|
||||
dipole-like electric field (electric organ discharge, EOD) oscillates in a quasi-sinusoidal
|
||||
fashion at frequencies from 700 to 1100 Hz (Zakon et al., 2002) with males emitting at
|
||||
higher frequencies than females (Meyer et al., 1987).
|
||||
\item The EOD of each individual fish
|
||||
has a specific frequency (the EOD frequency, EODf) that remains stable in time (exhibit-
|
||||
ing a coefficient of variation of the interspikes intervals as low as $2 ∗ 10^{−4} $; Moortgat et al., 1998).
|
||||
\item During social encounters, wave-type fish often modulate the frequency as
|
||||
well as the amplitude of their field to communicate (Hagedorn and Heiligenberg, 1985).
|
||||
\item Communication signals in A. leptorhynchus have been classified into two classes: (i) chirps are transient and stereotyped EODf excursions over
|
||||
tens of milliseconds (Zupanc et al., 2006), while (ii) rises are longer duration and more
|
||||
variable modulations of EODf, typically lasting for hundreds of milliseconds to sec-
|
||||
onds (Hagedorn and Heiligenberg, 1985; Tallarovic and Zakon, 2002). (OLD INFO ? RISES NOW OVER MINUTES/HOURS)
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{P-Units encoding}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item In baseline conditions (stimulus only own EOD), they fire irregularly at a certain baseline rate. Action potentials occur approximately at a certain phase of the EOD cycle, they are phase-locked to the EOD, but only with a certain probability to each cycle. The baseline rate differs from cell to cell (compare the two example cells in Fig. 2.2 A and B, Gussin et al., 2007)
|
||||
\item Since tuberous receptors are distributed over the whole body and the EOD spans the
|
||||
whole surrounding, all P-units of a given animal are stimulated with a similar stimulus
|
||||
(see Kelly et al. (2008) for an exact model of the EOD). Their noise sources are, however,
|
||||
uncorrelated (Chacron et al., 2005b).
|
||||
\item In response to a step increase in EOD amplitude, P-units exhibit pronounced spike frequency
|
||||
adaptation (Benda et al., 2005; Chacron et al., 2001b; Nelson et al., 1997; Xu et al., 1996).
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Chapter 4 - other models}
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item Kashimori et al.
|
||||
(1996) built a conductance-based model of the whole electroreceptor unit and were able to qualitatively reproduce the behaviour of different types of tuberous units.
|
||||
\item Nelson
|
||||
et al. (1997) constrained a stochastically spiking model by linear filters of the previously determined P-unit frequency tuning.
|
||||
\item Kreiman et al. (2000) used the same frequency
|
||||
filters to stimulate a noisy perfect integrate-and-fire neuron with which they investi-
|
||||
gated the variability of cell responses to random amplitude modulations (RAMs).
|
||||
\item To reproduce the probabilistic phase-locked firing and the correlations of the ISIs, Chacron
|
||||
et al. (2000) used a noisy leaky integrate-and-fire model with refractoriness as well as a
|
||||
dynamical threshold.
|
||||
\item Benda et al. (2005) used a firing rate model with a negative adap-
|
||||
tation current to reproduce the high-pass behaviour of P-units.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Zakon: Negative Interspike Interval Correlations Increase the Neuronal
|
||||
Capacity for Encoding Time-Dependent Stimuli}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item P-type electroreceptors on their skin detect amplitude modulations (AMs) of this field caused by nearby objects or conspecifics (for review, see Bastian, 1981; Zakon, 1986).
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\bibliography{citations}
|
||||
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\end{document}
|
||||
@ -1,19 +1,11 @@
|
||||
\select@language {english}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {1}Abstract}{2}{section.1}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2}Introduction}{2}{section.2}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {3}Materials and Methods}{3}{section.3}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.1}Notes:}{3}{subsection.3.1}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.2}Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{3}{subsection.3.2}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.3}Data Generation}{4}{subsection.3.3}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.4}Stimulus Protocols}{4}{subsection.3.4}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.5}Fitting of the Model}{4}{subsection.3.5}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {3.6}Henriette's structure:}{4}{subsection.3.6}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {4}Results}{5}{section.4}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {5}Discussion}{5}{section.5}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {6}Possible Sources}{5}{section.6}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {6.1}Henriette Walz - Thesis}{5}{subsection.6.1}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {6.1.1}Nervous system - Signal encoding}{5}{subsubsection.6.1.1}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {6.1.2}electrosensory system - electric fish}{6}{subsubsection.6.1.2}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {6.1.3}P-Units encoding}{7}{subsubsection.6.1.3}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {6.1.4}Chapter 4 - other models}{8}{subsubsection.6.1.4}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {6.2}Zakon: Negative Interspike Interval Correlations Increase the Neuronal Capacity for Encoding Time-Dependent Stimuli}{8}{subsection.6.2}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {1}Zusammenfassung}{3}{section.1}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2}Abstract}{3}{section.2}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {3}Introduction}{3}{section.3}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {4}Materials and Methods}{3}{section.4}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.1}Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{3}{subsection.4.1}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.2}Cell recordings}{5}{subsection.4.2}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.3}Stimulus Protocols}{6}{subsection.4.3}
|
||||
\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.4}Fitting of the Model}{6}{subsection.4.4}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {5}Results}{6}{section.5}
|
||||
\contentsline {section}{\numberline {6}Discussion}{6}{section.6}
|
||||
|
||||
@ -203,4 +203,3 @@
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Binary file not shown.
Binary file not shown.
Binary file not shown.
Binary file not shown.
BIN
thesis/figures/stimuliExamples.pdf
Normal file
BIN
thesis/figures/stimuliExamples.pdf
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
Binary file not shown.
@ -5,4 +5,62 @@ Benda, J. and Herz, A.~V. (2003).
|
||||
\newblock A universal model for spike-frequency adaptation.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Neural computation}, 15(11):2523--2564.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Benda et~al., 2005]{benda2005spike}
|
||||
Benda, J., Longtin, A., and Maler, L. (2005).
|
||||
\newblock Spike-frequency adaptation separates transient communication signals
|
||||
from background oscillations.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Journal of Neuroscience}, 25(9):2312--2321.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Chacron et~al., 2001a]{chacron2001negative}
|
||||
Chacron, M.~J., Longtin, A., and Maler, L. (2001a).
|
||||
\newblock Negative interspike interval correlations increase the neuronal
|
||||
capacity for encoding time-dependent stimuli.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Journal of Neuroscience}, 21(14):5328--5343.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Chacron et~al., 2001b]{chacron2001simple}
|
||||
Chacron, M.~J., Longtin, A., and Maler, L. (2001b).
|
||||
\newblock Simple models of bursting and non-bursting p-type electroreceptors.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Neurocomputing}, 38:129--139.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Chacron et~al., 2005a]{chacron2005delayed}
|
||||
Chacron, M.~J., Longtin, A., and Maler, L. (2005a).
|
||||
\newblock Delayed excitatory and inhibitory feedback shape neural information
|
||||
transmission.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Physical Review E}, 72(5):051917.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Chacron et~al., 2005b]{chacron2005electroreceptor}
|
||||
Chacron, M.~J., Maler, L., and Bastian, J. (2005b).
|
||||
\newblock Electroreceptor neuron dynamics shape information transmission.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Nature neuroscience}, 8(5):673--678.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Gussin et~al., 2007]{gussin2007limits}
|
||||
Gussin, D., Benda, J., and Maler, L. (2007).
|
||||
\newblock Limits of linear rate coding of dynamic stimuli by electroreceptor
|
||||
afferents.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Journal of neurophysiology}, 97(4):2917--2929.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Nelson et~al., 1997]{nelson1997characterization}
|
||||
Nelson, M., Xu, Z., and Payne, J. (1997).
|
||||
\newblock Characterization and modeling of p-type electrosensory afferent
|
||||
responses to amplitude modulations in a wave-type electric fish.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Journal of Comparative Physiology A}, 181(5):532--544.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Ratnam and Nelson, 2000]{ratnam2000nonrenewal}
|
||||
Ratnam, R. and Nelson, M.~E. (2000).
|
||||
\newblock Nonrenewal statistics of electrosensory afferent spike trains:
|
||||
implications for the detection of weak sensory signals.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Journal of Neuroscience}, 20(17):6672--6683.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Walz, 2013]{walz2013phd}
|
||||
Walz, H. (2013).
|
||||
\newblock {\em Encoding of Communication Signals in Heterogeneous Populations
|
||||
ofElectroreceptors}.
|
||||
\newblock PhD thesis, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.
|
||||
|
||||
\bibitem[Xu et~al., 1996]{xu1996logarithmic}
|
||||
Xu, Z., Payne, J.~R., and Nelson, M.~E. (1996).
|
||||
\newblock Logarithmic time course of sensory adaptation in electrosensory
|
||||
afferent nerve fibers in a weakly electric fish.
|
||||
\newblock {\em Journal of neurophysiology}, 76(3):2020--2032.
|
||||
|
||||
\end{thebibliography}
|
||||
|
||||
@ -3,44 +3,44 @@ Capacity: max_strings=35307, hash_size=35307, hash_prime=30011
|
||||
The top-level auxiliary file: notes.aux
|
||||
The style file: apalike.bst
|
||||
Database file #1: ../../citations.bib
|
||||
You've used 1 entry,
|
||||
You've used 11 entries,
|
||||
1935 wiz_defined-function locations,
|
||||
480 strings with 3819 characters,
|
||||
and the built_in function-call counts, 443 in all, are:
|
||||
= -- 44
|
||||
> -- 13
|
||||
< -- 1
|
||||
+ -- 6
|
||||
- -- 4
|
||||
* -- 39
|
||||
:= -- 77
|
||||
add.period$ -- 3
|
||||
call.type$ -- 1
|
||||
change.case$ -- 7
|
||||
chr.to.int$ -- 1
|
||||
cite$ -- 1
|
||||
duplicate$ -- 14
|
||||
empty$ -- 33
|
||||
format.name$ -- 7
|
||||
if$ -- 84
|
||||
int.to.chr$ -- 1
|
||||
552 strings with 5758 characters,
|
||||
and the built_in function-call counts, 4605 in all, are:
|
||||
= -- 462
|
||||
> -- 177
|
||||
< -- 3
|
||||
+ -- 62
|
||||
- -- 58
|
||||
* -- 427
|
||||
:= -- 798
|
||||
add.period$ -- 33
|
||||
call.type$ -- 11
|
||||
change.case$ -- 83
|
||||
chr.to.int$ -- 9
|
||||
cite$ -- 11
|
||||
duplicate$ -- 152
|
||||
empty$ -- 328
|
||||
format.name$ -- 73
|
||||
if$ -- 882
|
||||
int.to.chr$ -- 3
|
||||
int.to.str$ -- 0
|
||||
missing$ -- 1
|
||||
newline$ -- 8
|
||||
num.names$ -- 3
|
||||
pop$ -- 4
|
||||
missing$ -- 10
|
||||
newline$ -- 58
|
||||
num.names$ -- 33
|
||||
pop$ -- 60
|
||||
preamble$ -- 1
|
||||
purify$ -- 7
|
||||
purify$ -- 84
|
||||
quote$ -- 0
|
||||
skip$ -- 12
|
||||
skip$ -- 111
|
||||
stack$ -- 0
|
||||
substring$ -- 45
|
||||
swap$ -- 1
|
||||
substring$ -- 413
|
||||
swap$ -- 11
|
||||
text.length$ -- 0
|
||||
text.prefix$ -- 0
|
||||
top$ -- 0
|
||||
type$ -- 6
|
||||
type$ -- 66
|
||||
warning$ -- 0
|
||||
while$ -- 4
|
||||
while$ -- 41
|
||||
width$ -- 0
|
||||
write$ -- 15
|
||||
write$ -- 145
|
||||
|
||||
Binary file not shown.
@ -23,38 +23,42 @@
|
||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||
\begin{document}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{To-read}
|
||||
\section{To-note}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item other models/papers to P-units:
|
||||
other models/papers to P-units:
|
||||
|
||||
Bastian 1981a Electrolocation I. How the electroreceptors of Apteronotus albifrons code for moving objects and other electrical stimuli
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
%Benda and Herz 2003
|
||||
\cite{benda2003universal}
|
||||
|
||||
%Benda et al. 2005, 2006
|
||||
|
||||
%Chacron et al 2001, 2005a
|
||||
|
||||
%Kreiman et al. 2000
|
||||
|
||||
%Ludtke and Nelson 2006
|
||||
|
||||
%Nelson et al. 1997
|
||||
|
||||
%Ratman and Nelson 2000
|
||||
|
||||
%Wessel et al 1996
|
||||
\citep{benda2003universal}
|
||||
|
||||
%Xu et al 1996
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Introduction}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item electric fish
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item general: habitat,
|
||||
\item as model animal for ethology
|
||||
\item electric organ + eod
|
||||
\item sensory neurons p- and t(?)-type
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\item sensory perception
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item receptor $\rightarrow$ heterogenic population
|
||||
\item further analysis limited by what receptors code for - P-Units encoding
|
||||
\item p-type neurons code AMs
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item goal be able to simulate heterogenic population to analyze full coding properties $\rightarrow$ many cells at the same time needed $\rightarrow$ only possible in vitro/ with model simulations
|
||||
|
||||
\item Possible to draw representative values for model parameters to generate a population ?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Apteronotus leptorynchus}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
@ -64,6 +68,8 @@ Bastian 1981a Electrolocation I. How the electroreceptors of Apteronotus albifro
|
||||
\item continuous sinusoidal electric organ discharge EOD with near constant amplitude and frequency (Moortgat et al. 1998)
|
||||
|
||||
\item EOD carrier signal for AMs caused by nearby objects like prey or other electric fish
|
||||
|
||||
\item prey stimuli are dominated by low frequencies
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{general P-unit notes}
|
||||
@ -73,19 +79,22 @@ Bastian 1981a Electrolocation I. How the electroreceptors of Apteronotus albifro
|
||||
|
||||
\item most abundant tuberous receptor
|
||||
|
||||
\item spikes in probabilistic manner to upward phase of eod
|
||||
\item spikes in probabilistic manner to upward phase of EOD
|
||||
|
||||
\item important characterization P-value probability of spiking per EOD cycle estimated as p-unit frequency divided by eod frequency typical values 0.1-0.6 (Bastian 1981a, Xu et al 1997)
|
||||
\item important characterization P-value probability of spiking per EOD cycle estimated as p-unit frequency divided by EOD frequency typical values 0.1-0.6 (Bastian 1981a, Xu et al 1997)
|
||||
|
||||
\item rapidly adapting (Benda et al 2005, Xu et al. 1996) often studied with SAMs or RAMs
|
||||
\item rapidly adapting (\cite{benda2005spike} \cite{xu1996logarithmic}) often studied with SAMs or RAMs
|
||||
|
||||
\item can predict up to 80\% of the AM using reverse correlation and coherence but no obvious decoding mechanism
|
||||
|
||||
\item linear coders of intensity, additive noise models are suitable Gussin et al. 2007
|
||||
|
||||
\item ISI correlations important to detect both slow and fast varying stimuli \citep{chacron2001negative}
|
||||
The negative correlation reduce low frequency noise and information is preserved at higher/central neurons \citep{chacron2005electroreceptor}
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Coding}
|
||||
\subsection{neural and population coding}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{nerve recordings}
|
||||
@ -97,18 +106,157 @@ Bastian 1981a Electrolocation I. How the electroreceptors of Apteronotus albifro
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Mat\&Met}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item Data generation
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item How data was measured / which data used
|
||||
\item How data was chosen -> at least 30s baseline, 7 contrasts with 7 trials
|
||||
\item experimental protocols were allowed by XYZ (before 2012: All experimental protocols were approved and complied with national and regional laws (file no. 55.2-1-54-2531-135-09). between 2013-2016 ZP 1/13 Regierungspräsidium Tübingen and after 2016 ZP 1/16 Regierungspräsidium Tübingen)
|
||||
\item description of data -> Baseline properties, FI-Curve with images made from cells
|
||||
\item make a point of using also bursty cells as part of what is new in this work!
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item behavior parameters:
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item which behaviors were looked at / calculated and why (bf, vs, sc, cv, fi-curve...)
|
||||
\item how exactly were they calculated in the cell and model
|
||||
\item stimulus protocols
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item Construction of model
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item Explain general LIF
|
||||
\item parameters explanation, dif. equations
|
||||
\item Explain addition of adaption current
|
||||
\item note addition of noise + factor for the independence from step size
|
||||
\item addition of refractory period
|
||||
\item check between alpha in fire-rate model adaption and a-delta in LIFAC
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item Fitting of model to data
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item which variables where determined beforehand (None, just for start parameters)
|
||||
\item which variables where fit
|
||||
\item What method was used (Nelder-Mead) and why/(how it works?)
|
||||
\item fit routine ? (currently just all at the same time)
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Equations characterization}
|
||||
|
||||
Baseline
|
||||
|
||||
p-Value:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
p = \frac{neuron frequency}{EOD frequency}
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
|
||||
coefficient of variation:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
CV = \frac{STD(ISI)}{\langle ISI \rangle}
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
|
||||
serial correlation: \todo{check!}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
sc_i = \frac{\langle ISI_{k+j} ISI_k \rangle - \langle ISI_k \rangle^2}{VAR(ISI)}
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
|
||||
burstiness: \todo{what definition?}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
vector strength:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
FI-Curve:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{model construction}
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item PIF - LIF - LIFAC - LIFAC + refractory period
|
||||
|
||||
\item explain why adaption current and not a dynamic threshold: chosen AC other possibilities(dyn. thresh. voltage hyperpol.) why AC is better.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\item what things could be the physiological base for the different parts of the model
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Results}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item Results fitting
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item Errors of model behavior to cell behavior
|
||||
|
||||
\item Comparison model-vs-cell behavior distribution
|
||||
|
||||
\item correlations between parameters and behavior
|
||||
|
||||
\item correlation between final error and behavior parameters of the cell $\rightarrow$ hard to fit cell "types"
|
||||
|
||||
\item
|
||||
|
||||
\item comparison SAM stimuli response
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item "working with the models"
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item model parameter distribution
|
||||
|
||||
\item model parameter correlations
|
||||
|
||||
\item \todo{drawing random models ????}
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Discussion}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item todo
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\newpage
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Paper}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Limits of linear rate coding of dynamic stimuli by electroreceptor afferents}
|
||||
Daniel Gussin, Jan Benda, Leonard Maler, 2007, J neurophysiol
|
||||
|
||||
\citep{gussin2007limits}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
P-units may code for the intensity and slope of the stimulus and if the higher neuronal structures can separate these two parts they can detect the very weak signals they use in their behavior.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Introduction}
|
||||
@ -128,9 +276,11 @@ then more sophisticated methods like spike-triggered stimulus averages (STA) are
|
||||
\subsection{Simple models of bursting and non-bursting P-type electroreceptors}
|
||||
Maurice J. Chacron, Andre H Longtin , Leonard Maler, 2001
|
||||
|
||||
\citep{chacron2001simple}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item simple math. model of P-units for just the baseline behavior.
|
||||
\item simple math. model of P-units for just the \textbf{baseline behavior}.
|
||||
|
||||
\item uses dynamic threshold, abs refractory period, for bursty cells added a delayed depolarization current
|
||||
|
||||
@ -139,6 +289,206 @@ Maurice J. Chacron, Andre H Longtin , Leonard Maler, 2001
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Negative Interspike Interval Correlations Increase the neuronal capacity for encoding time-dependent stimuli}
|
||||
Maurice J. Chacron, Andre H Longtin , Leonard Maler, 2001
|
||||
|
||||
\citep{chacron2001negative}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item Based on baseline behavior and AM stimuli
|
||||
|
||||
\item Two different encoding might be used for low-frequency and high-frequency signals.
|
||||
|
||||
\item low-frequency: rate-code (mean firing frequency) in a counting time that reduces variability of the spike train (minimum in spike train variability caused by negative ISI correlations )
|
||||
|
||||
\item high-frequency: spike timing
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Electroreceptor neuron dynamics shape information transfer}
|
||||
|
||||
Maurice J. Chacron, Leonard Maler, Joseph Bastian, 2005
|
||||
|
||||
\citep{chacron2005electroreceptor}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item increased low frequency information is contained in the spike trains because of the negative serial correlation. This increased information is still available in central neurons.
|
||||
|
||||
\item conventional tuning curves don't capture the contained low-freq information and predict bad tuning for low frequencies, information tuning curves show the good coding of low frequencies.
|
||||
|
||||
\item ISI correlations have a noise shaping effect that increases the low-freq coding potential
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Characterization and modeling of P-type electrosensory afferent responses to amplitude modulations in wave-type electric fish}
|
||||
M.E. Nelson, Z. Xu, J.R. Payne, 1997
|
||||
|
||||
\citep{nelson1997characterization} \todo{go over once more how does their model work}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item quantitative model of baseline and response to AM stimuli
|
||||
|
||||
\item not a LIF model
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Non renewal statistics of electrosensory afferent spike trains: Implications for detection of weak sensory signals}
|
||||
|
||||
Rama Ratman and Mark E. Nelson, 2000
|
||||
|
||||
\citep{ratnam2000nonrenewal}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Delayed excitatory and inhibitory feedback shape neural information transmission}
|
||||
Maurice J. Chacron, Andre H Longtin , Leonard Maler, 2005
|
||||
|
||||
\citep{chacron2005delayed}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\item
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Encoding of Communication Signals in Heterogeneous Populations of Electroreceptors}
|
||||
Henriette Walz PhD 2013
|
||||
\citep{walz2013phd}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\item data generation - recordings
|
||||
\item model simulations - construction of model
|
||||
\item Simulation protocols
|
||||
\item Data analysis - calculation of behavior parameters
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item calculation of baseline parameters
|
||||
\item calculation of fi curve parameters
|
||||
\item stimuli step SAM(?) noise(?)
|
||||
\item goodness of fit
|
||||
\item sensitivity analysis (influence of par on model)
|
||||
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Possible Sources}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Henriette Walz - Thesis}
|
||||
\subsubsection{Nervous system - Signal encoding}
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item single neurons are the building blocks of the nervous system (Cajal 1899)
|
||||
\item encoding of information in spike frequency - rate code(first description(?) Adrian 1928) also find examples! (light flash intensity Barlow et al. 1971, )
|
||||
\item encoding info in inter spike intervals (Singer and Gary 1995)
|
||||
\item encoding time window (Theunissen and Miller 1995) "This time window is the time scale in which the encoding is assumed to take placewithin the nervous system
|
||||
\item encoding is noisy (Mainen and Sejnowski 1995, Tolhurst et al 1983, Tomko and Crapper 1974 -> review Faisal et al 2008) in part because of stimulus properties but also cell properties (Ion channel stochasticity (van Rossum et al.,2003))
|
||||
\item noise can be beneficial to encoding -> "stochastic resonance" (weak stimuli on thresholding devices like neurons, noise allows coding of sub threshold stimuli) (Benzi et al., 1981)
|
||||
\item single neurons are anatomically and computationally independent units, the
|
||||
representation and processing of information in vertebrate nervous systems is distributed
|
||||
over groups or networks of cells (for a review, see Pouget et al., 2000)
|
||||
\item It has
|
||||
been shown that the synchrony among cells carries information on a very fine temporal
|
||||
scale in different modalities, from olfaction (Laurent, 1996) to vision (Dan et al., 1998)
|
||||
\item In the electrosensory system it was shown before that communication signals change the synchrony of the receptor population (Benda et al., 2005, 2006)
|
||||
and that this is read out by cells in the successive stages of the electrosensory pathway
|
||||
(Marsat and Maler, 2010, 2012; Marsat et al., 2009).
|
||||
\item An advantage of rate coding in populations is that it is fast. The rate in
|
||||
single neurons has to be averaged over a time window, that is at least as long as the
|
||||
minimum interspike interval. In contrast, the population rate can follow the stimulus
|
||||
instantaneous, as it does not have to be averaged over time but can be averaged over
|
||||
cells (Knight, 1972a).
|
||||
\item In a population of neurons subject to neuronal noise, stochastic resonance occurs
|
||||
even if the stimulus is strong enough to trigger action potentials itself (supra-threshold
|
||||
stochastic resonance described by Stocks, 2000; see Fig. 1.1 B
|
||||
\item Cells of the same type and from the same population often vary in their stimulus sen-
|
||||
sitivity (Ringach et al., 2002) as well as in their baseline activity properties (Gussin et al., 2007; Hospedales et al., 2008)
|
||||
\item Heterogeneity has been shown to improve information coding in both situations, in the presence of noise correlations, for example in
|
||||
the visual system cells (Chelaru and Dragoi, 2008) or when correlations mainly originate
|
||||
from shared input as in the olfactory system (Padmanabhan and Urban, 2010)
|
||||
\item A prerequisite to a neural code thus is that it can be read out by other neurons (Perkel
|
||||
and Bullock, 1968).
|
||||
\item Development and evolution shape the functioning of many physiological systems and there is evidence that they also shape the encoding mechanisms of nervous systems. For example, the development of frequency
|
||||
selectivity in the auditory cortex has been shown to be delayed in animals stimulated
|
||||
with white noise only (Chang and Merzenich, 2003). Also, several encoding mechanisms can be related to the selective pressure that the energetic consumption of the nervous system has exerted on its evolution (Laughlin, 2001; Niven and Laughlin, 2008).
|
||||
These finding conformed earlier theoretical predictions that had proposed that coding
|
||||
should be optimized to encode natural stimuli in an energy-efficient way (Barlow, 1972). -> importance of using natural stimuli as the coding and nervous system could be optimized for unknown stimuli features not contained in the artificial stimuli like white noise.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\subsubsection{electrosensory system - electric fish}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item For decades, studies examining the neurophysiological systems of weakly electric
|
||||
fish have provided insights into how natural behaviors are generated using relatively
|
||||
simple sensorimotor circuits (for recent reviews see: Chacron et al., 2011; Fortune, 2006;
|
||||
Marsat and Maler, 2012). Further, electrocommunication signals are relatively easy to
|
||||
describe, classify and simulate, facilitating quantification and experimental manipulation. Weakly electric fish are therefore an ideal system for examining how communication signals influence sensory scenes, drive sensory system responses, and consequently
|
||||
exert effects on conspecific behavior.
|
||||
\item The weakly electric fish use active electroreception to navigate and communicate under
|
||||
low light conditions (Zupanc et al., 2001).
|
||||
\item In active electroreception, animals produce
|
||||
an electric field using and electric organ (and this electric field is therefore called the
|
||||
electric organ discharge, EOD) and infer, from changes of the EOD, information about
|
||||
the location and identification of objects and conspecifics in their vicinity (e.g. Kelly
|
||||
et al., 2008; MacIver et al., 2001). However, perturbations result not only from objects
|
||||
and other fish, but also from self-motion and other factors. All of these together make
|
||||
up the electrosensory scene. The perturbed version of the fish's own field on its skin
|
||||
is called the electric image (Caputi and Budelli, 2006), which is sensed via specialized
|
||||
receptors distributed over the body surface (Carr et al., 1982).
|
||||
\item In A. leptorhynchus, the
|
||||
dipole-like electric field (electric organ discharge, EOD) oscillates in a quasi-sinusoidal
|
||||
fashion at frequencies from 700 to 1100 Hz (Zakon et al., 2002) with males emitting at
|
||||
higher frequencies than females (Meyer et al., 1987).
|
||||
\item The EOD of each individual fish
|
||||
has a specific frequency (the EOD frequency, EODf) that remains stable in time (exhibit-
|
||||
ing a coefficient of variation of the interspikes intervals as low as $2 ∗ 10^{−4} $; Moortgat et al., 1998).
|
||||
\item During social encounters, wave-type fish often modulate the frequency as
|
||||
well as the amplitude of their field to communicate (Hagedorn and Heiligenberg, 1985).
|
||||
\item Communication signals in A. leptorhynchus have been classified into two classes: (i) chirps are transient and stereotyped EODf excursions over
|
||||
tens of milliseconds (Zupanc et al., 2006), while (ii) rises are longer duration and more
|
||||
variable modulations of EODf, typically lasting for hundreds of milliseconds to sec-
|
||||
onds (Hagedorn and Heiligenberg, 1985; Tallarovic and Zakon, 2002). (OLD INFO ? RISES NOW OVER MINUTES/HOURS)
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{P-Units encoding}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item In baseline conditions (stimulus only own EOD), they fire irregularly at a certain baseline rate. Action potentials occur approximately at a certain phase of the EOD cycle, they are phase-locked to the EOD, but only with a certain probability to each cycle. The baseline rate differs from cell to cell (compare the two example cells in Fig. 2.2 A and B, Gussin et al., 2007)
|
||||
\item Since tuberous receptors are distributed over the whole body and the EOD spans the
|
||||
whole surrounding, all P-units of a given animal are stimulated with a similar stimulus
|
||||
(see Kelly et al. (2008) for an exact model of the EOD). Their noise sources are, however,
|
||||
uncorrelated (Chacron et al., 2005b).
|
||||
\item In response to a step increase in EOD amplitude, P-units exhibit pronounced spike frequency
|
||||
adaptation (Benda et al., 2005; Chacron et al., 2001b; Nelson et al., 1997; Xu et al., 1996).
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Chapter 4 - other models}
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||
\item Kashimori et al.
|
||||
(1996) built a conductance-based model of the whole electroreceptor unit and were able to qualitatively reproduce the behaviour of different types of tuberous units.
|
||||
\item Nelson
|
||||
et al. (1997) constrained a stochastically spiking model by linear filters of the previously determined P-unit frequency tuning.
|
||||
\item Kreiman et al. (2000) used the same frequency
|
||||
filters to stimulate a noisy perfect integrate-and-fire neuron with which they investi-
|
||||
gated the variability of cell responses to random amplitude modulations (RAMs).
|
||||
\item To reproduce the probabilistic phase-locked firing and the correlations of the ISIs, Chacron
|
||||
et al. (2000) used a noisy leaky integrate-and-fire model with refractoriness as well as a
|
||||
dynamical threshold.
|
||||
\item Benda et al. (2005) used a firing rate model with a negative adap-
|
||||
tation current to reproduce the high-pass behaviour of P-units.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\bibliography{../../citations}
|
||||
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user