Limits...
Time-Dependent Increase in Network Response to Stimulation.

Hamilton F, Graham R, Luu L, Peixoto N - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: Here we demonstrate the effects of a high frequency electrical stimulation signal in training cultured networks of cortical neurons.This increase was found to be statistically significant as compared to control networks that did not receive training.This method was used to identify and track changes in network connectivity strength.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, United States of America.

ABSTRACT
In vitro neuronal cultures have become a popular method with which to probe network-level neuronal dynamics and phenomena in controlled laboratory settings. One of the key dynamics of interest in these in vitro studies has been the extent to which cultured networks display properties indicative of learning. Here we demonstrate the effects of a high frequency electrical stimulation signal in training cultured networks of cortical neurons. Networks receiving this training signal displayed a time-dependent increase in the response to a low frequency probing stimulation, particularly in the time window of 20-50 ms after stimulation. This increase was found to be statistically significant as compared to control networks that did not receive training. The timing of this increase suggests potentiation of synaptic mechanisms. To further investigate this possibility, we leveraged the powerful Cox statistical connectivity method as previously investigated by our group. This method was used to identify and track changes in network connectivity strength.

No MeSH data available.


Network response to stimulation was significantly different for trained networks compared to controls.Mean normalized spike frequency and spike reliability over the first 50 ms after stimulation for networks that received training (n = 12) and networks that were kept as controls (n = 10) are shown. (*) denotes statistical significance p < 0.05. Analysis indicated a statistically significant overall difference in spike frequency between trained groups when compared to control groups. There was no statistically significant overall difference in spike reliability.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4636320&req=5

pone.0142399.g004: Network response to stimulation was significantly different for trained networks compared to controls.Mean normalized spike frequency and spike reliability over the first 50 ms after stimulation for networks that received training (n = 12) and networks that were kept as controls (n = 10) are shown. (*) denotes statistical significance p < 0.05. Analysis indicated a statistically significant overall difference in spike frequency between trained groups when compared to control groups. There was no statistically significant overall difference in spike reliability.

Mentions: Results reported below are from n = 10 control and n = 12 trained networks. Fig 4 shows the overall effect over the first 50 ms after stimulation between networks that received training compared to networks kept as controls for both normalized spike frequency and normalized reliability. (*) denotes statistical significance of p < 0.05. Analysis revealed that there was a statistically significant overall difference in spike frequency between trained networks and control networks (F(1, 1.838) = 6.923, p < 0.05). Specifically, the mean normalized spike rate for trained networks was 1.377±0.090 and for control networks it was 1.024±0.099. This meant that post-training, networks that received the training signal responded to the probing stimulus with 37% more activity than they did pre-training. As expected, the response of control networks post-training did not differ greatly from their response pre-training. There was no statistically significant overall difference in spike reliability between the two groups.


Time-Dependent Increase in Network Response to Stimulation.

Hamilton F, Graham R, Luu L, Peixoto N - PLoS ONE (2015)

Network response to stimulation was significantly different for trained networks compared to controls.Mean normalized spike frequency and spike reliability over the first 50 ms after stimulation for networks that received training (n = 12) and networks that were kept as controls (n = 10) are shown. (*) denotes statistical significance p < 0.05. Analysis indicated a statistically significant overall difference in spike frequency between trained groups when compared to control groups. There was no statistically significant overall difference in spike reliability.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4636320&req=5

pone.0142399.g004: Network response to stimulation was significantly different for trained networks compared to controls.Mean normalized spike frequency and spike reliability over the first 50 ms after stimulation for networks that received training (n = 12) and networks that were kept as controls (n = 10) are shown. (*) denotes statistical significance p < 0.05. Analysis indicated a statistically significant overall difference in spike frequency between trained groups when compared to control groups. There was no statistically significant overall difference in spike reliability.
Mentions: Results reported below are from n = 10 control and n = 12 trained networks. Fig 4 shows the overall effect over the first 50 ms after stimulation between networks that received training compared to networks kept as controls for both normalized spike frequency and normalized reliability. (*) denotes statistical significance of p < 0.05. Analysis revealed that there was a statistically significant overall difference in spike frequency between trained networks and control networks (F(1, 1.838) = 6.923, p < 0.05). Specifically, the mean normalized spike rate for trained networks was 1.377±0.090 and for control networks it was 1.024±0.099. This meant that post-training, networks that received the training signal responded to the probing stimulus with 37% more activity than they did pre-training. As expected, the response of control networks post-training did not differ greatly from their response pre-training. There was no statistically significant overall difference in spike reliability between the two groups.

Bottom Line: Here we demonstrate the effects of a high frequency electrical stimulation signal in training cultured networks of cortical neurons.This increase was found to be statistically significant as compared to control networks that did not receive training.This method was used to identify and track changes in network connectivity strength.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, United States of America.

ABSTRACT
In vitro neuronal cultures have become a popular method with which to probe network-level neuronal dynamics and phenomena in controlled laboratory settings. One of the key dynamics of interest in these in vitro studies has been the extent to which cultured networks display properties indicative of learning. Here we demonstrate the effects of a high frequency electrical stimulation signal in training cultured networks of cortical neurons. Networks receiving this training signal displayed a time-dependent increase in the response to a low frequency probing stimulation, particularly in the time window of 20-50 ms after stimulation. This increase was found to be statistically significant as compared to control networks that did not receive training. The timing of this increase suggests potentiation of synaptic mechanisms. To further investigate this possibility, we leveraged the powerful Cox statistical connectivity method as previously investigated by our group. This method was used to identify and track changes in network connectivity strength.

No MeSH data available.