Predicting neuronal activity with simple models of the threshold type: Adaptive Exponential Integrate-and-Fire model with two compartments
Introduction
Electrophysiological data can be described by detailed conductance-based models (Hodgkin–Huxley-type models [6]). However, those models are rather complex, which implies that they are difficult to analyze and costly to implement numerically. Moreover, it is unclear how many details of conductance-based models are really necessary for the reproduction of experimental spike patterns [4], [13]. For those reasons, simple phenomenological spiking neurons such as Integrate-and-Fire models are highly popular.
The adaptive Exponential Integrate-and-Fire (aEIF) model used in this paper generalizes the standard leaky Integrate-and-Fire model in several directions: the strict threshold is replaced by a more realistic smooth threshold zone as in the Exponential Integrate-and-Fire neuron [2]. Furthermore, addition of a second variable captures subthreshold resonance or adaptation [7], [15]. The aEIF model showed convincing performances when compared to more detailed models [1], but so far, has never been tested on recordings of real neuron.
In this report, we will test the performances of the aEIF model on layer-V neocortical pyramidal neurons under random current injection.
Section snippets
Model
The aEIF is defined by [1]where is the membrane capacitance, the leak conductance, the resting potential, the slope factor and the threshold potential (Fig. 1). Note that formally, is not exactly the resting potential because of the exponential term. The variable describes the level of adaptation of the neuron and represents the relevance of subthreshold adaptation. The exponential term describes the early
Parameter fitting
Recordings of layer-V pyramidal neurons of rat neocortex were used to determine parameters of the model. The neurons were recorded intracellularly in vitro while stimulated at the soma by a randomly fluctuating current generated by an Ornstein–Uhlenbeck (OU) process (autocorrelation time 1 ms). Both mean and variance of the OU process were varied in order to sample the response of the neurons to various levels of tonic and time-dependent inputs. Details of the experimental procedure can be found
Results
The data set consists of four different neurons. For each cell, a set of 10 different input currents with different means and variances are injected. Each input trace is repeated four times. Fig. 3 shows a direct comparison between predicted and recorded spike trains for a typical neuron. Both spike trains are almost indistinguishable (Fig. 3A; for clarity reasons, the predicted spike train has been shifted upward). Even when zooming in the subthreshold regime, differences are in the range of a
Discussion and conclusion
We tested the aEIF model on experimental electrophysiology recordings and found a prediction of the spike times up to 96% (average of 60%). With the same data set, a Spike Response Model with dynamic threshold has been evaluated and the performances were up to 75% (average 65%) [8].
We remark that the protocol used for the recordings is not the most suitable for characterizing our model: in our extraction method, we had to set the subthreshold adaptation to 0. In addition, data
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Swiss National Science Foundation Grant number SNF 200020-108093/1.
Claudia Clopath has obtained her M.Sc. in physics from the EPFL, in April 2005. She is now a Ph.D. in the Laboratory of Computational Neuroscience at the EPFL and her current research interest is to describe neuronal activity with simple Integrate-and-Fire type models.
References (14)
- et al.
Adaptive exponential integrate-and-fire model as an effective description of neuronal activity
J. Neurophysiol.
(2005) - et al.
How spike generation mechanisms determine the neuronal response to fluctuating inputs
J. Neurosci.
(2003) - et al.
Spiking neuron Models: Single Neurons
(2002) - et al.
Global structure
robustness and modulation of neuronal models, J. Neurosci.
(2001) - et al.
A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve
J. Physiol.
(1952) Which model to use for cortical spiking neurons IEEE Trans. Neural Networks
(2004)- et al.
Predicting spike timing of neocortical pyramidal neurons by simple threshold models
J. Comput. Neurosci.
(2006)
Cited by (51)
Intermittency properties in a temporal lobe epilepsy model
2023, Epilepsy and BehaviorInterneuronal gamma oscillations in hippocampus via adaptive exponential integrate-and-fire neurons
2019, NeurocomputingCitation Excerpt :More importantly, its parameters resemble salient physiological features and quantities [3,46], and it has been fitted successfully to approximate the behavior of H-H type neurons as well as real recordings from cortical neurons [3,10,29]. We compare same network structures of two-variable Izhikevich and Morris–Lecar models, as Izhikevich model [27,28], exhibits a rich dynamical structure and a wide range of firing patterns as in AdEx model [10,46], and Morris–Lecar model [16,28], without a reset mechanism, possesses a rather different neuronal feature and oscillatory behaviors from AdEx model. We consider and discuss the effects of gap junctions and shunting inhibitions in studying gamma rhythms, and the generation of nested theta and gamma activities seen in hippocampus.
Periodically forced piecewise-linear adaptive exponential integrate-and-fire neuron
2013, International Journal of Bifurcation and ChaosPerson-Specific Biophysical Modeling of Alpha-Motoneuron Pools Driven by in vivo Decoded Neural Synaptic Input
2023, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
Claudia Clopath has obtained her M.Sc. in physics from the EPFL, in April 2005. She is now a Ph.D. in the Laboratory of Computational Neuroscience at the EPFL and her current research interest is to describe neuronal activity with simple Integrate-and-Fire type models.
Renaud Jolivet obtained his Ph.D. in theoretical neuroscience at EPFL, in 2005, after studies in biophysics at the University of Lausanne (M.Sc.). He is now a postdoc in the laboratory of Prof. Pierre Magistretti at the University of Lausanne where his research is focused on neuro-astrocytic interactions in the context of brain metabolism and signal processing.
Alexander Rauch obtained his M.D., in 2003, at the University of Bern after studies in medicine at the University of Basel. His clinical experience includes surgery and neurorehabilitation. Between 1999 and 2003, he has worked as an electrophysiologist at the University of Bern focusing his research on links between cortical pyramidal neurons and simple models of neuronal activity. He is now a research assistant in the laboratory of Prof. Nikos Logothetis at the Max-Planck-Institute where his research is focused on BOLD signal and brain imaging techniques.
Hans-Rudolf Lüscher is Director of the Department of Physiology, University of Bern, Switzerland. He has a Medical Degree from the University of Zürich, Switzerland. He did his postdoctoral training with Elwood Henneman at the Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA. He spent extended time periods at the Division of Neuroscience, John Curtin School of Medical Research, Canberra, Australia. Hans-Rudolf Lüscher served as Dean and Vice-Dean of the Medical Faculty, University of Bern. He is a member of the Science Council of the Swiss National Science Foundation and of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences.
Wulfram Gerstner received his Ph.D. degree in theoretical physics from the TU Munich, Germany, in 1993, after studies in Tübingen, Berkeley, and Munich. He is a Professor and Head of Laboratory of Computational Neuroscience, EPFL, Switzerland.