- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review E

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Delayed excitatory and inhibitory feedback shape neural information transmission

Maurice J. Chacron1,2,*, André Longtin1,2, and Leonard Maler2

  • 1Department of Physics, University of Ottawa, 150 Louis Pasteur, Ottawa, Canada K1N 6N5
  • 2Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada K1H 8M5

  • *Present address: Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, 730 van vleet Oval, Norman, Oklahoma 73072.
PDF

Phys. Rev. E 72, 051917 – Published 14 November, 2005

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.72.051917

Abstract

Feedback circuitry with conduction and synaptic delays is ubiquitous in the nervous system. Yet the effects of delayed feedback on sensory processing of natural signals are poorly understood. This study explores the consequences of delayed excitatory and inhibitory feedback inputs on the processing of sensory information. We show, through numerical simulations and theory, that excitatory and inhibitory feedback can alter the firing frequency response of stochastic neurons in opposite ways by creating dynamical resonances, which in turn lead to information resonances (i.e., increased information transfer for specific ranges of input frequencies). The resonances are created at the expense of decreased information transfer in other frequency ranges. Using linear response theory for stochastically firing neurons, we explain how feedback signals shape the neural transfer function for a single neuron as a function of network size. We also find that balanced excitatory and inhibitory feedback can further enhance information tuning while maintaining a constant mean firing rate. Finally, we apply this theory to in vivo experimental data from weakly electric fish in which the feedback loop can be opened. We show that it qualitatively predicts the observed effects of inhibitory feedback. Our study of feedback excitation and inhibition reveals a possible mechanism by which optimal processing may be achieved over selected frequency ranges.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (54)

  1. R. S. Cajal, Histologie du système nerveux de l’Homme et des vertébrés (Maloine, Paris, 1909).
  2. A. M. Sillito et al., Nature (London) 369, 479 (1994).
  3. B. Doiron, M. J. Chacron, L. Maler, A. Longtin, and J. Bastian, Nature (London) 421, 539 (2003).
  4. K. Macleod and G. Laurent, Science 274, 976 (1996).
  5. D. Contreras et al., Science 274, 771 (1996).
  6. C. Laing and A. Longtin, Neural Comput. 15, 2779 (2003).
  7. A. Treves, Network 4, 259 (1993).
  8. B. Doiron, B. Lindner, A. Longtin, L. Maler, and J. Bastian, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 048101 (2004).
  9. N. Brunel, J. Comput. Neurosci. 8, 183 (2000).
  10. M. Mattia and P. Del Giudice, Phys. Rev. E 66, 051917 (2002); 70, 052903 (2004).
  11. H. R. Wilson and J. D. Cowan, Biophys. J. 12, 1 (1972).
  12. D. J. Amit and M. Tsodyks, Network 2, 259 (1991); W. Gerstner, Phys. Rev. E 51, 738 (1995).
  13. N. Brunel and V. Hakim, Neural Comput. 11, 1621 (1999); M. Spiridon and W. Gerstner, Network 10, 257 (1999).
  14. H. C. Tuckwell, Nonlinear and Stochastic Theories (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1988).
  15. M. Steriade, TINS 22, 337 (1999).
  16. N. J. Berman and L. Maler, J. Exp. Biol. 202, 1243 (1999).
  17. C. E. Shannon, Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27, 379 (1948).
  18. F. Rieke et al., Spikes: Exploring the Neural Code (MIT, Cambridge, MA, 1996).
  19. F. Gabbiani, Network 7, 61 (1996).
  20. J. C. Roddey, B. Girish, and J. P. Miller, J. Comput. Neurosci. 8, 95 (2000). C. L. Passaglia and J. B. Troy, J. Neurophysiol. 91, 1217 (2004).
  21. I. Goychuk, Phys. Rev. E 64, 021909 (2001).
  22. F. Theunissen et al., J. Neurophysiol. 75, 1345 (1996).
  23. R. Wessel, C. Koch, and F. Gabbiani, J. Neurophysiol. 75, 2280 (1996).
  24. B. Lindner, M. J. Chacron, and A. Longtin, Phys. Rev. E 72, 021911 (2005).
  25. H. Risken, The Fokker-Planck Equation (Springer, Berlin, 1996).
  26. B. Lindner and L. Schimansky-Geier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2934 (2001).
  27. M. J. Chacron, B. Lindner, and A. Longtin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 080601 (2004).
  28. M. I. Dykman et al., Nuovo Cimento D 17, 661 (1995); A. Neiman, L. Schimansky-Geier, and F. Moss, Phys. Rev. E 56, R9 (1997); A. Neiman, A. Silchenko, V. Anishchenko, and L. Schimansky-Geier, 58, 7118 (1998).
  29. B. McNamara and K. Wiesenfeld, Phys. Rev. A 39, 4854 (1989).
  30. N. Fourcaud and N. Brunel, Neural Comput. 14, 2057 (2002).
  31. A. V. Holden, Models of the Stochastic Activity of Neurons (Springer, Berlin, 1976).
  32. P. C. Bressloff and S. Coombes, Neural Comput. 12, 91 (2000).
  33. C. van Vreeswijk and D. Hansel, Neural Comput. 13, 959 (2001).
  34. R. Krahe and F. Gabbiani, Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 5, 13 (2004).
  35. R. W. Turner, L. Maler, and M. Burrows, J. Exp. Biol. 202, 1167 (1999).
  36. J. Bastian, J. Comp. Physiol. [A] 144, 465 (1981).
  37. L. Maler, J. Comp. Neurol. 183, 323 (1979); L. Maler, E. K. Sas, and J. Rogers, 195, 87 (1981).
  38. E. K. Sas and L. Maler, J. Comp. Neurol. 221, 127 (1983); Anat. Embryol. (Berl) 177, 55 (1987).
  39. J. Bastian, M. J. Chacron, and L. Maler, Neuron 41, 767 (2004); M. J. Chacron, L. Maler, and J. Bastian, J. Neurosci. 25, 5521 (2005).
  40. J. Bastian, M. J. Chacron, and L. Maler, J. Neurosci. 22, 4577 (2002).
  41. M. J. Chacron, B. Doiron, L. Maler, A. Longtin, and J. Bastian, Nature (London) 423, 77 (2003).
  42. J. Bastian, J. Neurosci. 6, 553 (1986).
  43. C. Shumway, J. Neurosci. 9, 4400 (1989).
  44. N. J. Berman and L. Maler, J. Neurophysiol. 80, 3214 (1998).
  45. A. Destexhe and D. Paré, J. Neurophysiol. 81, 1531 (1999).
  46. J. S. Anderson et al., Science 290, 1968 (2000).
  47. C. A. Desoer and M. Vidyasagar, Feedback Synthesis: Input-Output Properties (Academic Press, New York, 1975).
  48. M. Stemmler, Network 7, 687 (1996); D. R. Chialvo, A. Longtin, and J. Muller-Gerking, Phys. Rev. E 55, 1798 (1997); M. J. Chacron, A. Longtin, M. St-Hilaire, and L. Maler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1576 (2000).
  49. J. Shin, Int. J. Electron. 74, 359 (1993).
  50. J. Shin, Neural Networks 14, 907 (2001).
  51. D. J. Mar et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 96, 10450 (1999).
  52. Delta-Sigma Data Converters, edited by S. R. Norsworthy, R. Schreier, and G. C. Temes (IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, 1997).
  53. F. S. Chance, L. F. Abbott, and A. D. Reyes, Neuron 35, 773 (2002).
  54. W. R. Softky and C. Koch, J. Neurosci. 13, 334 (1993). E. Salinas and T. J. Sejnowski, 20, 6193 (2000); W. Gerstner, Spiking Neuron Models-Single Neurons, Populations, Plasticity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2002).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. E 72, 051917– Published 14 November, 2005
  • Received 10 April 2005

© 2005 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation