4.5 Article

Deviance detection in physiologically identified cell types in the rat auditory cortex

期刊

HEARING RESEARCH
卷 399, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2020.107997

关键词

Predictive coding; Stimulus-specific adaptation; Spike width analysis; Inhibitory; Pyramidal; Fast spiking neurons; Regular spiking neurons

资金

  1. Spanish MINECO [SAF201675803-P]
  2. Juan de la Cierva Fellowship [FJCI-201627897]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated neuronal activities in the auditory cortex of animals under the oddball paradigm and found that both fast spiking and regular spiking neurons showed similar levels of deviance detection overall. However, in A1 area, fast spiking neurons exhibited significantly higher levels of deviance detection compared to regular spiking neurons.
Auditory deviance detection is a function of the auditory system that allows reduction of the processing demand for repetitive stimuli while stressing unpredictable ones, which are potentially more informative. Deviance detection has been extensively studied in humans using the oddball paradigm, which evokes an event-related potential known as mismatch negativity (MMN). The same stimulation paradigms are used in animal studies that aim to elucidate the neuronal mechanisms underlying deviance detection. In order to understand the circuitry responsible for deviance detection in the auditory cortex (AC), it is necessary to determine the properties of excitatory and inhibitory neurons separately. Measuring the spike widths of neurons recorded extracellularly from the anaesthetized rat AC, we classified them as fast spiking or regular spiking units. These two neuron types are generally considered as putative inhibitory or excitatory, respectively. In response to an oddball paradigm, we found that both types of units showed similar amounts of deviance detection overall. When considering each AC field separately, we found that only in A1 fast spiking neurons showed higher deviance detection levels than regular spiking neurons, while in the rest of the fields there was no such distinction. Interpreting these responses in the context of the predictive coding framework, we found that the responses of both types of units reflect mainly prediction error signaling (i.e., genuine deviance detection) rather than repetition suppression. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据