Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Asunto principal
Tipo de estudio
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMC Biol ; 21(1): 130, 2023 05 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37254137

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive recordings of gross neural activity in humans often show responses to omitted stimuli in steady trains of identical stimuli. This has been taken as evidence for the neural coding of prediction or prediction error. However, evidence for such omission responses from invasive recordings of cellular-scale responses in animal models is scarce. Here, we sought to characterise omission responses using extracellular recordings in the auditory cortex of anaesthetised rats. We profiled omission responses across local field potentials (LFP), analogue multiunit activity (AMUA), and single/multi-unit spiking activity, using stimuli that were fixed-rate trains of acoustic noise bursts where 5% of bursts were randomly omitted. RESULTS: Significant omission responses were observed in LFP and AMUA signals, but not in spiking activity. These omission responses had a lower amplitude and longer latency than burst-evoked sensory responses, and omission response amplitude increased as a function of the number of preceding bursts. CONCLUSIONS: Together, our findings show that omission responses are most robustly observed in LFP and AMUA signals (relative to spiking activity). This has implications for models of cortical processing that require many neurons to encode prediction errors in their spike output.


Asunto(s)
Corteza Auditiva , Animales , Ratas , Estimulación Acústica , Potenciales de Acción/fisiología , Corteza Auditiva/fisiología , Potenciales Evocados Auditivos/fisiología , Neuronas/fisiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA