Limits...
Functional identification of an antennal lobe DM4 projection neuron of the fruit fly

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML

No MeSH data available.


(A) PN with GFP expression under 60x magnification; (B) Schematic of the anatomy of the PN; (C) Circuit diagram of the simulated PN model; (D) Identified PRC of the simulated PN model; The injected current varies from 25 [pA] to 60 [pA] with step size 1 [pA]; (E) Identified PRC of PN. The injected current varies from 30 [pA] to 50 [pA] with step size 5 [pA]; (F-J) Comparison between identified PRC of simulated PN model and the in vivo PN; Injected current value is 30 [pA] to 50 [pA] with step size 5 [pA] from (F) to (J). Time is in seconds.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4126497&req=5

Figure 1: (A) PN with GFP expression under 60x magnification; (B) Schematic of the anatomy of the PN; (C) Circuit diagram of the simulated PN model; (D) Identified PRC of the simulated PN model; The injected current varies from 25 [pA] to 60 [pA] with step size 1 [pA]; (E) Identified PRC of PN. The injected current varies from 30 [pA] to 50 [pA] with step size 5 [pA]; (F-J) Comparison between identified PRC of simulated PN model and the in vivo PN; Injected current value is 30 [pA] to 50 [pA] with step size 5 [pA] from (F) to (J). Time is in seconds.

Mentions: Here we identify the PNs both in silico and in vivo. Starting with simulations, we investigate the feasibility of the CIM method on PNs modeled as pseudo uni-polar neurons in silico, as shown in Figures 1.(B) and 1.(C). We then systematically convert the CIM method into a step-by-step experimental protocol, and carry it out in vivo by injecting currents into PNs using the patch clamping technique [6,7]. A snapshot of PN patching is depicted in Figure 1.(A).


Functional identification of an antennal lobe DM4 projection neuron of the fruit fly
(A) PN with GFP expression under 60x magnification; (B) Schematic of the anatomy of the PN; (C) Circuit diagram of the simulated PN model; (D) Identified PRC of the simulated PN model; The injected current varies from 25 [pA] to 60 [pA] with step size 1 [pA]; (E) Identified PRC of PN. The injected current varies from 30 [pA] to 50 [pA] with step size 5 [pA]; (F-J) Comparison between identified PRC of simulated PN model and the in vivo PN; Injected current value is 30 [pA] to 50 [pA] with step size 5 [pA] from (F) to (J). Time is in seconds.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4126497&req=5

Figure 1: (A) PN with GFP expression under 60x magnification; (B) Schematic of the anatomy of the PN; (C) Circuit diagram of the simulated PN model; (D) Identified PRC of the simulated PN model; The injected current varies from 25 [pA] to 60 [pA] with step size 1 [pA]; (E) Identified PRC of PN. The injected current varies from 30 [pA] to 50 [pA] with step size 5 [pA]; (F-J) Comparison between identified PRC of simulated PN model and the in vivo PN; Injected current value is 30 [pA] to 50 [pA] with step size 5 [pA] from (F) to (J). Time is in seconds.
Mentions: Here we identify the PNs both in silico and in vivo. Starting with simulations, we investigate the feasibility of the CIM method on PNs modeled as pseudo uni-polar neurons in silico, as shown in Figures 1.(B) and 1.(C). We then systematically convert the CIM method into a step-by-step experimental protocol, and carry it out in vivo by injecting currents into PNs using the patch clamping technique [6,7]. A snapshot of PN patching is depicted in Figure 1.(A).

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML

No MeSH data available.