Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleNew Research, Sensory and Motor Systems

Temporal Processing in the Visual Cortex of the Awake and Anesthetized Rat

Ida E. J. Aasebø, Mikkel E. Lepperød, Maria Stavrinou, Sandra Nøkkevangen, Gaute Einevoll, Torkel Hafting and Marianne Fyhn
eNeuro 24 July 2017, 4 (4) ENEURO.0059-17.2017; https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0059-17.2017
Ida E. J. Aasebø
1Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mikkel E. Lepperød
1Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Norway
2Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mikkel E. Lepperød
Maria Stavrinou
3Faculty of Science and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Norway
4Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sandra Nøkkevangen
1Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gaute Einevoll
3Faculty of Science and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Norway
5Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Torkel Hafting
2Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Torkel Hafting
Marianne Fyhn
1Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Single unit activity followed between the awake state, anesthesia, and the recovery from anesthesia. A, Two example units in all three states, spike waveforms and spike clusters are shown. B, Box plot of the firing rates of the units from recording sessions in the awake state, anesthesia, and recovery from anesthesia (n = 193). C, Scatter plot of the firing rates for all single units in the awake and anesthetic state. D, Single ensemble of 17 simultaneously recorded units illustrating within-ensemble variations of firing rate reduction with anesthesia (Isoflurane). E, Firing rates in active and sessile sessions relative to anesthesia (n = 51). F, right panel, Scatter plot of wave form properties of the spikes of all units, y-axis represent the time from peak to trough (ms) and the x-axis shows the duration (ms) of the peak at half amplitude. Green: NS = narrow spiking units (n = 31); black: BS = broad spiking units (n = 209); orange: Tri = triphasic units (n = 11). Left panel, Example waveforms of BS, NS, and Tri-units. G, Firing rate of narrow spiking units (n = 31) versus broad spiking units (n = 209) in the awake and anesthetized state. H, Firing rates in three different anesthetic regimes: Isoflurane/Dormicum (n = 145), Isoflurane (n = 70), Ketamine/Xylazine (n = 49). I, Percentage of units that respond to anesthesia with an increase in firing rate. J, Difference in firing rates between the first 10 and the last 60 min of anesthesia (Iso/Dor n = 109, Iso n = 65, Ket/Xyl n = 45). K, Raster plot of the evoked- spontaneous index for each unit in the awake and anesthetic state (n = 257). L, Box plot of indexes calculated on spontaneous activity in both states, and evoked activity in both states for each unit. M, Evoked and spontaneous index for units across three anesthetic regimes (Iso n = 70, Ket/Xyl n = 48, Iso/Dor n = 133). All box and whiskers plots line show median, upper quartile, lower quartile and whiskers indicate Tukey interquartile range.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Evoked response latencies of the LFP and single units followed from the awake state to anesthesia. A, Example traces from one experiment in awake and anesthesia showing the typical LFP signature following stimulus onset. B, Box plot of the latency of the stimulus onset to the trough and peak of the LFP signature *1.5 SD of the mean (n = 17). C, Comparison of the time between trough and peak in each condition. D, Comparison of amplitude (mV) of troughs and peaks in each condition. E, Top, Average stimulus-evoked LFP in awake and anesthesia across all experiments (n = 25 in nine animals). Error bars indicate SEM. Bottom, Morlet wavelet of LFP activity following visual stimulation in the awake and anesthetized animals. F, Stimulus evoked firing rates (top) and raster plots (bottom) of all trials in all units in each state. One line represents one trial (96 trials per unit). Trials are ranked according to awake firing rates from high to low rate from (bottom up) for each anesthetic. G, PSTH of evoked firing rates for all units followed between the awake and anesthetized state (error bars, SEM). H, PSTH of normalized firing rates spanning the time period of the average peak of evoked activity. I, Scatterplot showing latency (ms) to the first peak evoked response for all units in awake and anesthesia. Red dotted line indicates regression. J, Box plot comparing bins of first peak max responses and first peak onset for all units between awake and anesthesia (n = 262,130). K, Frequency distribution of the awake-anesthesia difference in latency for each unit. L, Box plot showing first peak latency for units in three anesthetic regimes (Iso/Dor n = 133, Iso n = 71, Ket/Xyl n = 47).

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Temporal structure parameters, pairwise correlations and CV, of units followed between states. A, Pair-wise CC matrix for an example population (8 units) in both states. B, Box plot showing the CC for all pairwise correlations in awake, anesthesia and recovery (n = 733 cell-pairs). C, Scatter plot of pair-wise CC for pairs of neurons in the awake and anesthetized state (n = 1046). Black line indicates regression. D, Box plot showing the CCs during stimulus-evoked and spontaneous activity for all units. E, left panel, Example LFP trace with a typical burst suppression (BuS) pattern and no burst suppression (non-BuS). Right panel, Box plot showing CCs for pairs in sessions dominated by burst suppression (n = 276) compared with non-BS sessions (n = 210). F, Box plot showing the CCs for cell-pairs in three different anesthetic regimes: Isoflurane (n = 371), Ketamine/Xylazine (n = 246), and Isoflurane/Dormicum (n = 436). G, Scatter plot of the CV for single units in the awake and anesthetized state (n = 218). H, Box plot of the awake-anesthetized CV difference for units in each anesthetic regime (Iso n = 56, Iso/Dor n = 118, Ket/Xyl n = 44).

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Temporal sequences within unit ensembles followed between states. A, Top panel, Description of MSL measure. Left, Raster plot of two representative units firing with different MSL to visual stimuli. Right, illustration of sequence representation for MSL measure. Bottom panels, MSL (red dots) for units within ensembles, sorted by their ranked sequence (MSL) in the other session. Gray indicates activity normalized between 0 and 1 (awake-awake, n = 88; awake-anesthesia, n = 82; anesthesia-anesthesia, n = 78). B, top panel, Illustration of the quantification of the single trial rank measure. Bottom panels, Histograms of single trial rank CCs. MSLs for individual stimuli presentations are rank correlated with the mean latency response across many stimuli presentations from a separate experimental session (awake-awake, n = 604; awake-anesthesia, n = 596; anesthesia-anesthesia, n = 294). Yellow outline indicates shuffled data. C, top panel, The rank-by-rank measure is described. Bottom panel, Line graph showing the CCs from the rank-by-rank measure for the individual populations (n = 8 populations). D, Single trial rank correlations for the sessile-movement (n = 352) and movement-anesthesia (n = 402) comparisons. E, Single trial rank correlations for the awake-anesthesia and anesthesia-anesthesia comparisons for three different anesthetic regimes: Isoflurane, isoflurane-Dormicum, and Ketamine/Xylazine. F, Example populations, from the three anesthetic regimes (Iso n = 15 units, Ket/Xyl n = 19, Iso-Dor n = 8).

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Responses to visual stimuli of different spatial frequencies between awake and anesthesia (A–G). A, The possible position of the awake rats in the recording box gives a theoretical range of spatial frequencies of the stimuli. The maximum and minimum size of cycles considering varied distance to screen is plotted and show that overlap is restricted to one spatial frequency group. B, Average normalized firing rates for all units in each spatial frequency (n = 68). Error bars indicate SEM. Firing rates normalized by scaling between 0 and 1. C, Number of units responding maximally to each spatial frequency in awake and anesthesia. D, left panel, Comparison of normalized activity in awake and anesthesia during visual stimuli with low spatial frequencies (0.02 and 0.04 c/d) for units preferring a low spatial frequency stimuli in the awake state (n = 75). Right panel, Same for units preferring high spatial frequencies of visual stimuli in awake (0.16 and 0.3 c/d; n = 75). E, PSTH for an example unit during visual stimuli with a low spatial frequency (top panel) and a high spatial frequency (bottom panel) in the awake state and during anesthesia. F, Scatterplot of evoked latencies for the lowest spatial frequency (0.02 c/d) and the highest spatial frequency (0.3 c/d) for the awake state (left panel) and during anesthesia (right panel). G, Box plot of first peak latencies for units under five different spatial frequencies during awake and anesthesia. Responses to visual stimuli of different temporal frequencies between awake and anesthesia (H–J). H, Average normalized firing rates for all units in each temporal frequency. I, Number of units responding maximally to each temporal frequency in awake and anesthesia. J, Box plot of first peak latencies for units under visual stimulation with three different temporal frequencies during awake and anesthesia. Error bars indicate SEM. Firing rates normalized by scaling between 0 and 1.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Awake-anesthesia data compared to data from the Brunel-type network model. Anesthetics are color coded. A, left panel, Spontaneous rate. Right panel, Evoked rate. B, left panel, Pairwise CCs. Right panel, CV. C, Peak latency (ms). D, Probability density of the membrane potential in the awake (left panel) and anesthetized (right panel) network model. E, left panel, Network model threshold distributed mean. Right panel, Threshold distributed variance.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Parameter values for simulations

    Parameter nameAwakeAnesthetized
    Synaptic delay (D)1.5 ms
    Membrane capacitance (C)281 pF
    Membrane time constant (τm)281/20 ms
    Threshold (θ)−50.5 mV
    Refractory period (τrp)2 ms
    Equilibrium potential (EL)−60 mV−65 mV
    Reset potential (Vr)−60 mV−65 mV
    Excitatory synaptic efficacy (JE)0.5 mV
    Relative inhibition (g)10.511
    Excitatory connectivity (εE)0.1
    Inhibitory connectivity (εI)0.1
    Number of neurons (N)10000
    Excitatory neurons (NE)8000
    Cortical input rate (υE,I,ext)0.7 Hz
    Cortical connectivity (ε)0.1
    Thalamic rate (υE,I,pulse)1 Hz
    Thalamic connectivity (ε)0.1
    Thalamic duration50 ms
    Trials of thalamic input100
    Simulation time100 * 1050 ms
    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Statistical description of all tests

    ComparisonData structureType of testPower or confidence interval (lower/upper 95%)
    Figure 1B, awake-anesthesia-recoveryNon-normalFriedman’s and Dunn’s post hocAwake CI: 2.74/3.83.Anesthesia CI: 0.90/1.41Recovery CI: 2.41/3.54
    Figure 1E, active-sessile-anesthesiaNon-normalFriedman’s and Dunn’s post hocActive CI:3.32/5.39Sessile CI:2.93/4.89Anesthesia CI: 1.48/3.47
    Figure 1G, narrow spiking firing rates awake-anesthesiaNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAwake CI: 4.38/9.21Anesthesia CI: 0.81/3.29
    Figure 1G, broad spiking firing rates awake-anesthesiaNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAwake CI: 2.23/2.88Anesthesia CI: 0.85/1.29
    Figure 1G, NS aw-an difference versus BS aw-an differenceNon-normalMann–Whitney U testBS diff CI: 1.16/1.81NS diff CI: 2.54/6.95
    Figure 1H, awake-IsofluraneNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAwake CI: 2.92/4.72Iso CI: 0.60/1.41
    Figure 1H, awake-Isoflurane/DormicumNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAwake CI: 2.51/3.30Iso/Dor CI: 0.74/1.28
    Figure 1H, awake-Ketamine/XylazineNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAwake CI: 1.78/3.27Ket/Xyl CI: 1.75/4.02
    Figure 1H, aw-an difference between anestheticsNon-normalKruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hocIso/Dor diff CI: 1.26/2.18Iso diff CI: 1.95/3.68Ket/Xyl diff CI: −1.16/0.44
    Figure 1J, firing rate stability over 1 h, between anestheticsNon-normalKruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hocIso/Dor diff CI: -0.08/0.38Iso diff CI: 0.95/2.66Ket/Xyl diff CI: −1.00/ −0.08
    Figure 1K, index of spontaneous and evoked activity compared between awake and anesthesiaNormalPaired t testEv/sp index awake-ev/sp index anest CI: −0.20/ −0.12
    Figure 1M, evoked-spontaneous index change between awake and the different anestheticsIso/Dor diffs: Non-normalIso diffs: NormalKet/Xyl diffs: NormalIso/Dor: WilcoxonIso and Ket/Xyl: paired t testIso/Dor diff CI: −0.29/−0.17Iso diff CI: −0.18/ −0.05Ket/Xyl diff CI: −0.14/0.01
    Figure 1L, comparison of spontaneous aw/spontaneous an index with evoked aw/evoked an indexNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testSpont Aw/Spont An index CI: 0.49/0.59Evoked Aw/Evoked An index CI: 0.27/0.36
    Evoked/spontaneous index comparison between moving, sessile, and anesthesiaNon-normalFriedman’s and Dunn’s post hocMov-Sess ev/sp CI: −0.03/0.08Mov-Anest ev/sp CI: −0.20/ −0.05Sess-Anest ev/sp CI: −0.24/ −0.06
    Figure 2B, visually evoked trough latency (LFP)Non-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAw Trough CI: 0.13/0.14An Trough CI: 0.14/0.17
    Figure 2B, visually evoked peak latency (LFP)Non-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAw peak CI: 0.19/0.24An peak CI: 0.28/0.42
    Figure 2C, comparison of the difference between trough and peak latency (LFP) in awake and anesthesiaNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAw trough-peak CI: 0.05/0.10An trough-peak CI: 0.15/0.26
    Figure 2D, peak amplitude awake-anesthesiaNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAw peak amp CI: 102/183.5An peak amp CI: 34/73.37
    Figure 2J, first evoked peak latency for single units, comparison aw-anNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAw peak CI: 96.69/112.5An peak CI:141.4/164.7
    Figure 2J, first evoked peak latency onset for single units, comparison aw-anNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testAw peak CI: 63.34/87.66An peak CI:93.25/116.6
    Figure 2I, correlation latency aw-anNon-normalSpearman’sLatency diff aw-an CI: 35/61.86
    Figure 2L, latency anesthetic regimes; comparison of aw-anIso/Dor and Iso: non-normalKet/Xyl: normalIso/Dor and Iso: Wilcoxon signed ranks testKet/Xyl: paired t testDiff aw-IsoDor CI: 54.02/92.27Diff aw-Iso CI: −3.15/46.93Diff aw-KetXyl CI: −4.13/45.32
    Figure 2L, latency anesthetic regimes; comparison between regimesNon-normalKruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hocDiff aw-IsoDor CI: 54.02/92.27Diff aw-Iso CI: −3.15/46.93Diff aw-KetXyl CI: −4.13/45.32
    Figure 3B, pair-wise CCs aw-an-reNon-normalFriedman’s and Dunn’s post hocCC Aw CI: 0.008/0.012CC An CI:0.027/0.034CC Re CI: 0.004/0.008
    Figure 3C, pair-wise CC aw-an correlationNon-normalSpearman’s rank correlationAw CI: 0.008/0.011An CI: 0.023/0.028
    Figure 3B, pair-wise CC aw-an-re1Non-normalFriedman’s and Dunn’s post hocCC Aw CI: 0.008/0.013CC An CI: 0.029/0.036CC Re1 CI: 0.004/0.008
    Figure 3B, pair-wise CC aw-an-re2Non-normalFriedman’s and Dunn’s post hocCC Aw CI: 0.007/0.012CC An CI: 0.027/0.035CC Re2 CI: 0.004/0.009
    Figure 3D, pair-wise CC evoked aw-anNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testCC Aw Ev CI: 0.023/0.027CC An Ev CI: 0.030/0.035
    Figure 3D, pair-wise CC Spontaneous aw-anNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testCC Aw Sp CI: 0.027/0.032CC An Sp CI: 0.037/0.046
    Figure 3D, pair-wise CC awake ev-spNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testCC Aw Ev CI: 0.023/0.027CC Aw Sp CI: 0.027/0.032
    Figure 3D, pair-wise CC anesthesia ev-spNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testCC An Ev CI: 0.030/0.035CC An Sp CI: 0.037/0.046
    Figure 3E, pair-wise CC Aw-BSNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testCC Aw CI: 0.005/0.011CC BS CI: 0.040/0.052
    Figure 3E, pair-wise CC Aw-non-BSNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testCC Aw CI: 0.008/0.016CC Non-BS CI:0.023/0.036
    Figure 3E, pair-wise CC Diff Aw-BS vs Aw-non-BSNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testCC Diff Aw-BS CI: −0.043/−0.033CC Diff Aw-NonBS CI: −0.022/-0.013
    Figure 3F, pair-wise CC across anesthetic regimesNon-normalKruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hocCC Aw-Iso CI: −0.036/−0.027CC Aw-Ket/Xyl CI:-0.010/-0.005CC Aw Iso/Dor CI:-0.012/-0.005
    Figure 3G, CV in units in awake and anesthesiaNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testCV Awake CI: 1.16/1.24CV Anest CI: 1.04/1.14
    Figure 3H, CV within Aw-Iso, Aw-Iso/Dor, Aw-Ket/XylNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testsCV Aw-iso diff CI: −0.12/0.14CV Aw-iso/dor diff CI: −0.20/−0.05CV Aw-ket/xyl diff CI: −0.35/−0.11
    Figure 3H, CV between anesthetic regimesNon-normalKruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hocCV Aw-iso diff CI: −0.12/0.14CV Aw-iso/dor diff CI: −0.20/−0.05CV Aw-ket/xyl diff CI: -0.35/-0.11
    Figure 4A, MSL correlation between statesNon-normalSpearman’s rank correlationAw1-Aw2 CI: 0.29/0.60An1-An2 CI: 0.32/0.64Aw-An CI: 0.10/0.48
    Figure 4B, single trial rank correlations (CC); comparison aw-aw, aw-an, an- anNon-normalKruskal-Wallis and Dunn’s post hocAw-Aw CC CI: 0.17/0.23Aw-An CC CI: 0.06/0.13An-An CC CI: 0.18/0.28
    Skewness test; t test to a theoretical mean of zero on single trial rank dataNormalOne-sample t testAw-Aw CI: 0.168/0.255Aw-An CI: 0.065/0.148An-An CI: 0.193/0.284
    CCs for individual populations of >15 units followed between statesNon-normalSpearman’s rank correlationPop1: Aw-aw CI: 0.50/0.94Aw-an CI: −0.42/0.62Pop2: Aw-aw CI: 0.44/0.90Aw-an CI: −0.34/0.62An-an CI:0.26/0.87Pop3: Aw-aw CI: −0.03/0.77Aw-an CI: −0.06/0.77An-an CI: 0.24/0.87Pop4: Aw-aw CI: 0.05/0.80Aw-an CI: 0.32/0.88An-an CI:0.25/0.86
    Skewness test; t test to a theoretical mean of zero on single trial rank shuffled dataNormalOne-sample t testAw-Aw CI: −0.023/0.066Aw-An CI: −0.048/0.037An-An CI: −0.066/0.027
    ANOVA on single trial rank corr shuffle dataNormalOne-way ANOVAAw-Aw CI: −0.023/0.066Aw-An CI: −0.048/0.037An-An CI: −0.066/0.027
    Single trial rank correlations (CC) versus shuffled units in all comparisonsNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testsData Aw-aw CC CI: 0.17/0.23Shuffle Aw-aw CC CI: −0.012/0.05Data Aw-an CC CI: 0.06/0.13Shuffle Aw −an CC CI:0.00/0.07Data An-An CC CI: 0.18/0.28Shuffle An-an CC CI: −0.07/0.02
    Figure 4C Rank by rank measure. Comparison of single population CCs between states.NormalANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc testCC Aw-aw CI: 0.28/0.67CC Aw-an CI: −0.41/0.38CC Aw-an CI: 0.51/0.74
    Figure 4D, single trial rank correlations (CC) for sessile-moving vs moving-anesthesia comparisonNon-normalMann–Whitney U testSessMov CI: 0.094/0.177MovAnest CI: 0.032/0.106
    Figure 5B, comparison of normalized responses to various spatial frequenciesNon-normalWilcoxon signed ranks testsSF 0.02 c/d Aw and An CI: 0.44/0.56 and 0.42/0.5SF 0.04 c/d Aw and An CI: 0.47/0.57 and 0.42/0.54SF 0.08 c/d Aw and An CI: 0.40/0.52 and 0.41/0.54SF 0.16 c/d Aw and An CI: 0.36/0.48 and 0.31/0.42SF 0.3 c/d Aw and An CI: 0.39/0.51 and 0.29/0.40
    Figure 5D, correlation between awake and anesthetized normalized unit responses in units with the awake preference of low spatial frequenciesNon-normalSpearman’s rank correlationLow SF pref CI: 0.23/0.61
    Figure 5D, correlation between awake and anesthetized normalized unit responses in units with the awake preference of high spatial frequenciesNon-normalSpearman’s rank correlationHigh SF pref CI: -0.31/0.15
    Figure 5H, comparison of normalized responses to various temporal frequencies2 Hz: Normal4 Hz: Non-normal8 Hz: NormalPaired t test and Wilcoxon signed ranks testsTF 2 Hz Aw and An CI: 0.50/0.60 and 0.45/0.56TF 4 Hz Aw and An CI: 0.41/0.54 and 0.42/0.54TF 8 Hz Aw and An CI: 0.34/0.47 and 0.34/0.48
    Figure 5G, first peak latencies for units under different spatial frequenciesSF 0.02 vs 0.04, 0.08, 0.16 and 0.3 c/d: Non-normal, Normal, Normal and Normal.SF 0.04 vs 0.08, 0.16 and 0.3 c/d: Normal, Normal and Normal.SF 0.08 vs 0.16 and 0.3 c/d: Non-normal and NormalSF 0.16 vs 0.16 c/d: NormalPaired t test and Wilcoxon signed ranks testsSF 0.02 c/d Aw and An CI: 99.1/136.3 and 179.6/231.6SF 0.04 c/d Aw and An CI: 104.7/134.7 and 181.6/222.6SF 0.08 c/d Aw and An CI: 92.15/121 and 158.2/205.9SF 0.16 c/d Aw and An CI: 98.27/136.6 and 144.6/194.2SF 0.3 c/d Aw and An CI: 95.34/129.2 and 126.6/181.6
    First peak delay between awake and anesthesia in all spatial frequenciesSF 0.02 c/d: NormalSF 0.04 c/d: Non-normalSF 0.08 c/d: Non-normalSF 0.16 c/d: Non-normalSF 0.3 c/d: NormalPaired t tests and Wilcoxon signed ranks testsSF 0.02 c/d Diff CI: 59.8/113.8SF 0.04 c/d Diff CI: 53.57/110.1SF 0.08 c/d Diff CI: 43.25/104SF 0.16 c/d Diff CI: 26.28/88.95SF 0.3 c/d Diff CI: 5.42/73.04
    Figure 5J, first peak latencies for units under different temporal frequenciesTF 2 vs 4 and 8 Hz:Non-normal and NormalTF 4 vs 8 Hz: NormalPaired t tests and Wilcoxon signed ranks testTF 2 Hz Aw and An CI: 91.22/135.9 and 159.6/211.8TF 4 Hz Aw and An CI: 84.6/117.6 and 155.6/203.8TF 8 Hz Aw and An CI: 84.88/122.5 and 149.5/194.7
    First peak delay between awake and anesthesia in all spatial frequenciesTF 2 Hz:NormalTF 4 Hz: Non-normalTF 8 Hz: NormalPaired t tests and Wilcoxon signed ranks testTF 2 Hz Diff CI: 43.59/104.4TF 4 Hz Diff CI: 41.04/92.87TF 8 Hz Diff CI: 34.64/101.9
Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 4 (4)
eNeuro
Vol. 4, Issue 4
July/August 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Temporal Processing in the Visual Cortex of the Awake and Anesthetized Rat
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Temporal Processing in the Visual Cortex of the Awake and Anesthetized Rat
Ida E. J. Aasebø, Mikkel E. Lepperød, Maria Stavrinou, Sandra Nøkkevangen, Gaute Einevoll, Torkel Hafting, Marianne Fyhn
eNeuro 24 July 2017, 4 (4) ENEURO.0059-17.2017; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0059-17.2017

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Temporal Processing in the Visual Cortex of the Awake and Anesthetized Rat
Ida E. J. Aasebø, Mikkel E. Lepperød, Maria Stavrinou, Sandra Nøkkevangen, Gaute Einevoll, Torkel Hafting, Marianne Fyhn
eNeuro 24 July 2017, 4 (4) ENEURO.0059-17.2017; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0059-17.2017
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
    • Author Response
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • anesthesia
  • Awake
  • computational modeling
  • Single Units
  • Temporal Sequences
  • visual cortex

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

New Research

  • A Very Fast Time Scale of Human Motor Adaptation: Within Movement Adjustments of Internal Representations during Reaching
  • Optogenetic Activation of β-Endorphin Terminals in the Medial Preoptic Nucleus Regulates Female Sexual Receptivity
  • Hsc70 Ameliorates the Vesicle Recycling Defects Caused by Excess α-Synuclein at Synapses
Show more New Research

Sensory and Motor Systems

  • Independent encoding of orientation and mean luminance by mouse visual cortex
  • Different But Complementary Motor Functions Reveal an Asymmetric Recalibration of Upper Limb Bimanual Coordination
  • Serotonergic Suppression of Sustained Synaptic Responses in Rat Oculomotor Neural Integrator Networks
Show more Sensory and Motor Systems

Subjects

  • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2026 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.