bioRxiv ScienceSearch

Biology subjects

Neto, J. P.

Publications and source records attributed to Neto, J. P..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Recording from the same neuron with high-density CMOS probes and patch-clamp: a ground-truth dataset and an experiment in collaboration.

We built a rig to perform patch-clamp and extracellular recordings from the same neuron in vivo. In this setup, the axes of two micromanipulators are precisely aligned and their relative position tracked in real-time, allowing us to accurately target patch-clamp recordings to neurons near an extracellular probe. We used this setup to generate a publicly-available dataset where a cortical neurons spiking activity is recorded in patch-clamp next to a dense CMOS Neuropixels probe. "Ground-truth" datasets of this kind are rare but valuable to the neuroscience community, as they power the development and improvement of spike-sorting and analysis algorithms, tethering them to empirical observations. In this article, we describe our approach and report exploratory and descriptive analysis on the resulting dataset. We study the detectability of patch-clamp spikes on the extracellular probe, within-unit reliability of spike features and spatiotemporal dynamics of the action potential waveform. We open discussion and collaboration on this dataset through an online repository, with a view to producing follow-up publications. PrologueOur efforts to record from the same neuron in vivo using patch-clamp and dense extracellular probes have resulted in three outputs: a publicly-available dataset (http://bit.ly/paired_recs), a manuscript, and a code repository (http://bit.ly/paired_git). Together, these three components form the publication arising from the experiments we have performed. The role of the dataset is to be downloaded and re-used. The role of the manuscript is to describe the experimental methods through which we acquired the dataset, explain it and showcase which types of questions it can be used to address. The repository has two roles: first, promoting reproducibility and error correction. By making our analysis and figure-generation code freely-available, we wish to make our analysis procedures clear and enable the reader to reproduce our results from the raw data, alerting us to any potential mistakes. Second, the repository will form a living, dynamic and interactive component of the publication: a forum for open collaboration on this dataset. Any interested scientists can contribute to it, joining us in detailed exploration of these recordings with a view to producing follow-up publications in which they will be credited for their input. Why did we opt to publish this way? The first reason is that the very nature of the project we here describe - recording the same neuron with patch-clamp and extracellular probes - invites an open science and open source approach. This is because the primary use of this type of "ground truth" validation data is to aid the development of new sorting and analysis algorithms, as well as to benchmark and improve existing ones. The second reason is that despite being conceptually very simple, this project generated a large and complex dataset that can be tackled in many ways and used to address different types of question. Some of these questions are beyond the reach of our analytical expertise; others lie even beyond the scope of our scientific imagination. By releasing the dataset and providing a repository for scientific discussion and collaboration, we aim to maximise its scientific return to the community. Instead of having each interested research group work in isolation, we hope that by encouraging collaboration and discussion between peers we can foster synergy between them that will lead to work of greater scientific value. Although datasets like ours are exquisitely suited for such an approach, we believe this publication strategy needs to become more widely adopted in neuroscience. We were pleased to note recent publications spontaneously and independently using similar approaches1-4, in what may well be evidence of convergent thinking. Perhaps the time has come for new publication and collaboration paradigms. We will elaborate on this subject during the Epilogue. For now, let us get back to electrophysiological recordings, before we begin an experiment on scientific collaboration.

neuroscience

Why not record from every channel with a CMOS scanning probe?

It is an uninformative truism to state that the brain operates at multiple spatial and temporal scales, each with each own set of emergent phenomena. More worthy of attention is the point that our current understanding of it cannot clearly indicate which of these phenomenological scales are the significant contributors to the brains function and primary output (i.e. behaviour). Apart from the sheer complexity of the problem, a major contributing factor to this state of affairs is the lack of instrumentation that can simultaneously address these multiple scales without causing function altering damages to the underlying tissue. One important facet of this problem is that standard neural recording devices normally require one output connection per electrode. This limits the number of electrodes that can fit along the thin shafts of implantable probes generating a limiting balance between density and spread. Sharing a single output connection between multiple electrodes relaxes this constraint and permits designs of ultra-high density probes. Here we report the design and in-vivo validation of such a device, a complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) scanning probe with 1344 electrodes; the outcome of the European research project NeuroSeeker. We show that this design targets both local and global spatial scales by allowing the simultaneous recording of more than 1000 neurons spanning 7 functional regions with a single shaft. The neurons show similar recording longevity and signal to noise ratio to passive probes of comparable size and no adverse effects in awake or anesthetized animals. Addressing the data management of this device we also present novel visualization and monitoring methods. Using the probe with freely moving animals we show how accessing a number of cortical and subcortical brain regions offers a novel perspective on how the brain operates around salient behavioural events. Finally, we compare this probe with lower density, non CMOS designs (which have to adhere to the one electrode per output line rule). We show that an increase in density results in capturing neural firing patterns, undetectable by lower density devices, which correlate to self-similar structures inherent in complex naturalistic behaviour. To help design electrode configurations for future, even higher density, CMOS probes, recordings from many different brain regions were obtained with an ultra-dense passive probe.

neuroscience

Does impedance matter when recording spikes with polytrodes?

Extracellular microelectrodes have been widely used to measure brain activity, yet there are still basic questions about the requirements for a good extracellular microelectrode. One common source of confusion is how an electrodes impedance affects the amplitude of extracellular spikes and background noise.\n\nHere we discuss how an electrodes impedance affects data quality in extracellular recordings, which is crucial for both the detection of spikes and their assignment to the correct neurons. This study employs commercial polytrodes containing 32 electrodes (177 m2) arranged in a dense array. This allowed us to directly compare, side-by-side, the same extracellular signals measured by modified low impedance (~100 kOhm) microelectrodes with unmodified high impedance (~1 MOhm) microelectrodes. We begin with an evaluation of existing protocols to lower the impedance of the electrodes. The poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)-polystyrene sulfonate (PEDOT-PSS) electrodeposition protocol is a simple, stable, and reliable method for decreasing the impedance of a microelectrode up to tenfold. We next record in vivo using polytrodes that are modified in a chess board pattern, such that the signal of one neuron is detected by multiple coated and non-coated electrodes. The performance of the coated and non-coated electrodes is then compared on measures of background noise and amplitude of the detected action potentials.\n\nIf the proper recording system is used, then the impedance of a microelectrode within the range of standard polytrodes (~ 0.1 to 2 MOhm) does not significantly affect data quality and spike sorting. This study should encourage neuroscientists to stop worrying about one more unknown.

neuroscience