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 ArticleMethods/New Tools, Novel Tools and Methods

The systemDrive: a Multisite, Multiregion Microdrive with Independent Drive Axis Angling for Chronic Multimodal Systems Neuroscience Recordings in Freely Behaving Animals

Myles W. Billard, Fatemeh Bahari, John Kimbugwe, Kevin D. Alloway and Bruce J. Gluckman
eNeuro 19 December 2018, 5 (6) ENEURO.0261-18.2018; https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0261-18.2018
Myles W. Billard
1Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
2Center for Neural Engineering, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Fatemeh Bahari
1Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
2Center for Neural Engineering, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Fatemeh Bahari
John Kimbugwe
2Center for Neural Engineering, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kevin D. Alloway
2Center for Neural Engineering, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
3Department of Neural and Behavioral Sciences, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kevin D. Alloway
Bruce J. Gluckman
1Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
2Center for Neural Engineering, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
4Department of Neurosurgery, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Bruce J. Gluckman
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Targeting the sleep–wake regulatory network. a, A sagittal brain section with structures implicated in sleep–wake regulation. The structures are distributed across multiple regions of brainstem. Color codes represent the postulated states of vigilance during which specific cell populations within each structure are predominantly active: red is non-REM (NREM) sleep; blue is REM sleep; and green is wake. Brain region names and acronyms are as follows: ventrolateral pre-optic nucleus (VLPO), laterodorsal tegmental nucleus (LDT), pedunculopontine tegmental nucleus (PPT), dorsal raphe (DR), and locus coeruleus (LC). b, Coronal brain sections that highlight SWRS populations DR and LDT underneath sensitive anatomic structures highlighted in orange. These dorsal structures should not be damaged during chronic recording studies, and so safe access to the targets requires independent and angled electrode trajectories. Labels are as follows: vein (v), pineal gland (Pi), cerebral aqueduct (Aq), and fourth ventricle (4V). Depth information is in millimeters with horizontal tics representing 1 mm. Coronal sections were adapted with permission from Paxinos and Watson (2007, their Figs. 95 and 104; copyright Elsevier).

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

    The flexible drive axis. a, Diagram of the FDA. The FDA has a long flexible body tube that is fixed at the top to the microdrive and has a free end with a placement tube. The free implant end is inserted into a skull-fixed guide cannula contralateral to the microdrive fixed point. This creates a second fixed point on the axis. The constrained geometry allows the electrode bundle to move precisely through the tubing and to exit the placement tube at the angle set by the guide cannula. b, Placement of FDAs to multiple targets from multiple implant sites. The independent angling of each FDA provides maximal spatial recording coverage of targets while avoiding sensitive brain structures. During FDA positioning, the placement tube is slid into the guide cannula (diameter, 226 µm). The FDA is positioned once the body tube meets the top of the guide cannula. Depth information is in mm with horizontal tics representing 1 mm. Width-scaled guide cannulas (front section, *; back section, ◊) have been included to better contextualize potential damage to brain from the implant. FDA components on both subpanels are not drawn to scale. Coronal sections were adapted with permission from Paxinos and Watson (2007, their Figs. 95 and 104; copyright Elsevier).

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

    Stereotaxic targeting diagram. Diagram of the FDA stereotaxic targeting method and the stereotaxic unit (STU). a, The ventral end of the FDA can be implanted at a user-defined absolute driving distance Δ away from a target, indicated by the red X, along any arbitrary trajectory. This is achieved by using the STU to carry the guide cannula to the correct coordinates and implant depth. The top of the guide cannula is the same diameter as the body tube (8.9 mil) and thus sets the stopping point of the placement tube (6.3 mil). The difference between the length of the placement tube R and the length from the top of the guide cannula to the tip of the STU α is known by subtracting the two premeasured values. Thus, ventral depth of the FDA is guaranteed by implanting the STU a distance ζ from the target, which is calculated using the Distance to Target equation. b, A series of photographs showing the STU without and with a guide cannula attached. The STU is a surgical stylus that contains a spacer tube (6.3 mil) and a stopper tube (8.9 mil). The guide cannula is slid onto the STU until it reaches the stopper tube. During surgery, the STU is implanted, the guide cannula is fixed to the skull, and then the STU is removed, which leaves just the guide cannula in place. Red scale bar, 2 mm.

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

    Microdrive system details. a, The FDA is made of a tubing structure that encloses a microwire electrode bundle as it is pushed through the drive axis by a drive spring. The shuttle tube is rigidly attached to a bridge on the head of the drive spring and can move through the body tube. As the drive spring is moved up or down with the turning of a drive screw, the shuttle tube and electrodes move with the spring head. The body tube is fixed to the microdrive body with cyanoacrylate. The body tube is very long, as marked by the black break lines. The placement tube is fixed within the bottom of the body tube. Petroleum jelly space fills the ventral end of the placement tube, except at the electrode tips, to prevent fluids and proteins from entering the drive axis and binding the electrode bundle. b, c, Isometric (b) and side (c) 3D-rendered computer-aided design (CAD) model views of the complete microdrive system to scale. Elements of the system include the following: the microdrive body (light gray structure), drive springs and screws, FDAs, an electrode interface board (green printed circuit board) with a 36-position Omnetics connector, an Intan RHD2216 amplifier, and a headmount (dark gray base and cap). The cap of the headmount has been sliced to view the elements inside. d, Top, front, side, and isometric 3D-rendered CAD model views of the microdrive body. The four primary features on the microdrive body are: the drive positions, the screw columns, the base feet, and the spring wedges. The two drive position arrays have tap holes for 000-120 threads and are angled at 20° with respect to the level screw columns. The 20° provides clearance for the screwdriver when driving and allows the long flexible implants to naturally extend over midline, as depicted in the side view of c. The high-density design has 14 usable drive positions to allow for the targeting of implant sites along an extended rostrocaudal range. Each individual drive position is 2.5 mm in width and includes a drive axis hole for fixing the drive axis bundles to the microdrive body. The two screw columns have 00-90 tap holes and are spaced apart by 20 mm. The feet of the microdrive have 00-90 through-holes and are where the microdrive body is secured to the headmount base. The 1 mm tall spring wedge is on the outside of the drive position arrays and is angled at 20°. The microdrive body is 20 mm in length, 16 mm in height, and 18.68 mm in width. e, Isometric 3D-rendered CAD model views of the headmount. The headmount is composed of two components: the base and the cap. The base has a 4-40 tap hole for the cap screws and a smaller 0.66 mm hole that gets enlarged and tapped with 00-90 threads for the foot screws that secure the microdrive body to the headmount base. The base has a centered 15.01 × 11.46 mm opening for access to the cranium, which allows the placement of multiple guide cannulas and extrasensor modalities. The opening has sloped side and back walls to provide extra room for the maneuverability of forceps when placing the microdrive onto an animal. The 3D CAD models for the Omnetics Nano Strip connector and Intan RHD2216 amplifier were downloaded from the Omnetics (part A79026-001, http://www.omnetics.com/products/neuro-connectors/nano-strip-connectors) and Intan (http://intantech.com/downloads.html) web sites.

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

    Microdrive placement. a, b, Photographs of a fully constructed microdrive with four drive axes. c–i, Chronological photographs from a microdrive placement procedure with the following four nonparallel, separated drive axis targets: VLPO, DR, PPT, and LDT. c, The microdrive is attached to a custom 3D-printed placement tool, which can be manipulated by the stereotaxic device. d, Petroleum-jelly plugs, highlighted by the four black arrows, are first removed from the skull-fixed guide cannulas. Leads of the accessory electrodes, which include cortical screws and hippocampal depth electrodes, are taped down to the side of the headmount base for later riveting. e, f, The microdrive is lowered with the stereotaxic device, and the placement tubes of each drive axis are inserted into the skull-fixed guide cannulas, one of which is highlighted with a black arrow in f. The placement tubes are guided using customized forceps that have small notches near the tips to grab and manipulate the tubes without crushing them. g, All four placement tubes are engaged with their respective guide cannulas. h, The placement tubes are closer to being in complete position. Once the drive axes are in place, the bottom of the body tube, which is highlighted with black marker, will be seated on top of the guide cannula. i, After all the drive axes are seated, the microdrive is secured to the headmount base with the foot screws and the placement tool is removed. Finally, the cortical screw and depth electrode leads are riveted into the EIB.

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

    Targeting accuracy across multiple subjects. Coronal histologic sections taken from a total of four different chronically recorded subjects that demonstrate FDA targeting accuracy and repeatability from multiple brainstem areas. The target structures displayed include the following: bilateral PPT, bilateral LDT, and DR. Implant coordinates and angling for targets are in Table 3. The left column contains histology from three separate subjects, all of whom had other FDA sites. The right column contains histology from a single subject. a–d, NADPH-stained coronal sections that show electrode tracks at bilateral PPT regions (targeting parameters for left column, right column in mm: R = 9.17, 9.28; α = 7.21, 7.41; Δ = 1). e–h, NADPH-stained coronal sections that show electrode tracks at bilateral dorsal and ventral LDT regions (R = 9.20, 9.28; α = 7.16, 7.41; Δ = 2). i–l, Nissl-stained coronal sections that show electrode tracks at the DR nucleus (R = 8.83, 9.28; α = 7.02, 7.41; Δ = 1, 1.25). The red boxes indicate approximate areas from whole-slice images, which are zoomed-in on subsequent images. The yellow dashed lines indicate the estimated boundary of target structures. The red arrows indicate the estimated end of electrode tracks. Scale bars: a, c, e, g, h, i, j, k, l (4× magnified images), 1000 µm; b, f (10× magnified images), 100 µm; d (10× magnified images), 200 µm.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    Chronic recording stability. a, b, For an hour-long block of data background, the RMS of the time series from on the microwire in dorsal raphe (a) and one accelerometer channel (b) are computed over 5 s long overlapping windows (overlap = 1 s). c, The RMS background of the microwire channel remains flat with respect to the accelerometer activity during the hour. The maximal range of the background noise (∼7 µV) is much smaller than the amplitude of the action potentials recorded on that channel (c, right).

  • Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Simultaneously recorded single units. Example single unit action potentials simultaneously recorded from up to three target SWRS structures. Units across (n = 8) subjects were classified as state dependent by observing changes in firing rates during and outside of characteristic sleep–wake states. The subject numbers correspond to those in Table 4, but the order has been rearranged for the sake of grouping units from the same structures. The y-axis and x-axis of each scale bar represent 50 µV and 1 ms, respectively.

  • Figure 9.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 9.

    Chronic single-unit stability. Extracellular action potentials recorded simultaneously from PPT, LDT, and DR over a continuous 7 d recording session. Waveforms were averaged over 12 h periods to correspond with light (black traces) and dark (orange traces) cycles, which were separated because of the change in time-of-day dependence of the firing rates. The x-axis is days starting from onset of recordings in a particular recording session. The number subscripts for each region represent the group electrode channel on which each unit was recorded. Data missing from part of day 3 were the result of a computer acquisition failure. Scale: 1 ms.

  • Figure 10.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 10.

    Multimodal neural circuit recordings. The Microdrive provides a suite of measurements including hippocampal LFPs, ECoG, and unit recordings from multiple brainstem cell groups. a–e, From a typical daytime hour of continuous recording, we extracted the power spectral density (PSD) of one LFP channel (a), one channel of head acceleration (orange trace) with hypnogram overlaid (black trace; b), and single-unit firing rates from three different SWRS structures (PPT, c; LDT, d; DR, e), with the inset representing the hour-long average waveforms. Based on the PSD and accelerometer activity, we find that PPT and LDT neurons are REM-on while the particular neuron in DR is REM-off. Magenta triangles indicate periods of high-amplitude activity similar to what is reported in high-voltage rhythmic spike discharges (Pearce et al., 2014; Taylor et al., 2017; Shaw, 2004). Hypnogram legend: Exploratory wake with hippocampal theta rhythm (WakeT), Wake, NREM, REM, transitions between NREM and REM (NRT). Scale, 50 µV, 1 ms.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1:

    FDA tubing parameters

    Element nameTube diameter (mil)Tube length (mm)
    Shuttle tube6.38–10
    Body tube8.917–18, 16–17
    Placement tube6.311–12, 13–14
    Guide cannula8.96–6.5
    • Tube names with associated diameters and lengths that are used as part of the flexible drive axis. The two sets of values in the tube length cells of the body tube and placement tube are the ranges of lengths used when constructing flexible implants for SWRS targets DR, PPT, LDT, and LC (R ∼ 9 mm) and deeper VLPO targets (R ∼ 11 mm).

    • View popup
    Table 2:

    Chronic implant craniotomies

    Targets/coordinatesAPML
    Anterior screws11±3
    Middle screws7.5±4
    Left posterior screw3−4
    Right posterior screw2.5, 33, 4
    Depth electrode pairs5±2.5, ±3
    PPT0.5, 1±2
    DR1.5−2.5
    LDT0.36, 0.482, −2.5
    VLPO8.761.5, 2
    LC−0.721.3
    • AP and ML coordinates [Intreraural (IA)-referenced, in mm] for chronic implant craniotomies. Each subject had all craniotomies for screw and depth electrodes, plus selected craniotomies for SWRS targets. Coordinates are from Paxinos and Watson (2007).

    • View popup
    Table 3:

    Chronic implant target coordinates

    Targets/coordinatesAPMLDVAngle
    Depth electrodes5±2.5, ±37.2–7.8
    (−2.0 to −2.6 from cortex)
    Embedded Image
    PPT0.5, 1±23.6 Embedded Image
    DR1.503.6 Embedded Image
    LDT0.36, 0.48±0.83.0 Embedded Image
    VLPO8.76±10.75, 112.2°, 15.12°, 15.52°
    LC−0.721.33.2 Embedded Image
    • Anterior-posterior (AP), medial-lateral (ML), and dorsal-ventral (DV) target coordinates (IA-referenced, units of mm) with the absolute trajectory angles for each implant. Coordinates are from Paxinos and Watson (2007).

    • View popup
    Table 4:

    Success rates of chronic FDA targeting: cumulative neurons per target

    AnimalRecording duration (d)[no. of sessions]PPTLDTDRVLPOLC
    LeftRightLeftRightRight
    142 [13]NUNU23 (47)
    221 [5]NUNUNU
    337 [12]21 (42)13 (33)17 (43)
    457 [9]19 (29)8 (29)10 (18)
    573 [12]1 (7)NU7 (18)
    666 [10]9 (20)4 (14)10 (27)
    743 [8]20 (24)22 (29)11 (32)10 (26)
    839 [7]4 (6)12 (19)2 (3)4 (9)
    954 [9]Kinked28 (47)31 (44)NU
    1057 [9]6 (8)21 (43)3 (23)5 (13)
    1134 [8]27 (42)Kinked9 (15)6 (16)
    1229 [8]17 (25)19 (30)NU5 (16)
    1339 [6]14 (30)7 (16)Kinked3 (8)0 (4)
    SOV-dependent unit count (total unit count)159 (295)113 (198)123 (270)33 (88)0 (4)
    • Success rates of animals with simultaneous chronic recordings from multiple SWRS targets. The cells include information about which targets had FDAs as well as the number of well defined SOV-dependent and total units counted over the entire course of recordings for each axis and animal. The final row is the sum of SOV and total units over all animals in the cohort. Animals 1–6 had three FDAs, animals 7–12 had a total of four FDAs, and animal 13 had a total of five FDAs. Formatting of cells refer to the following conditions: recorded units with histologic validation that the electrodes hit the target (bold); recorded units with no histologic validation (italics); recorded activity but no units crossed the 7 SD threshold (NU). Some implanted FDAs got kinked, which prevented electrodes from driving. Sessions were continuous 24 h/7 d/week recording periods between electrode driving sessions. Recording sessions typically lasted between 5 and 7 d.

    • View popup
    Table 5:

    Success rates of chronic FDA targeting: recorded neurons per session

    AnimalPPTLDTDRVLPOLC
    1[6, 2, 3, 4, 2, 3, 3, 4, 8, 5, 1, 3, 3] (3.61 ± 1.85)
    2
    3[4, 2, 5, 6, 6, 8, 11, 7, 9, 5, 4, 8] (6.25 ± 2.49)[6, 2, 4, 6, 6, 5, 5, 3, 2, 1, 2, 1] (3.58 ± 1.97)
    4[5, 6, 7, 5, 8, 7, 7, 6, 7] (6.44 ± 1.01)[2, 4, 2, 2, 2, 1, 0, 2, 3] (2 ± 1.11)
    5[0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 2] (0.58 ± 0.79)[1, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 3] (1.5 ± 1.16)
    6[0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 3, 4, 4, 3, 5] (2 ± 2)[0, 0, 0, 2, 2, 1, 3, 3, 1, 2] (1.4 ± 1.17)[1, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 4, 3, 4, 1] (2.7 ± 1.05)
    7[4, 3, 3, 2, 3, 4, 2, 3] (3 ± 0.76)[5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 2, 4] (3.62 ± 1.88)[5, 5, 4, 3, 5, 4, 2, 4] (4 ± 1.07)[6, 3, 3, 4, 4, 2, 1, 3] (3.25 ± 1.49)
    8[0, 2, 2, 1, 0, 0, 1] (0.85 ± 0.9)[0, 0, 6, 3, 4, 3, 3] (2.71 ± 2.14)[0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 1, 0] (0.43 ± 0.53)[3, 2, 3, 1, 0, 0, 0] (1.28 ± 1.38)
    9Kinked[6, 7, 5, 6, 5, 5, 4, 6, 3] (5.22 ± 1.2)[1, 1, 4, 7, 6, 6, 8, 5, 6] (4.88 ± 2.47)[0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
    10[0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0, 3, 1] (0.88 ± 1.53)[6, 5, 3, 4, 8, 3, 3, 7, 4] (4.77 ± 1.85)[0, 2, 3, 0, 5, 3, 4, 2, 4] (2.56 ± 1.74)[6, 1, 2, 0, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0] (1.44 ± 1.87)
    11[1, 7, 8, 4, 6, 6, 3, 7] (5.25 ± 2.37)Kinked[5, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 4] (1.87 ± 2)[1, 2, 5, 3, 2, 3, 0, 0] (2 ± 1.69)
    12[5, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 4] (3.12 ± 0.99)[5, 3, 3, 3, 5, 2, 5, 4] (3.75 ± 1.16)[0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0][5, 3, 2, 3, 0, 0, 2, 1] (2 ± 1.69)
    13[6, 6, 5, 3, 5, 5] (5 ± 1.09)[0, 4, 6, 3, 1, 2] (2.66 ± 2.16)Kinked[2, 3, 2, 1, 0, 0] (1.33 ± 1.21)[2, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0] (0.67 ± 1.03)
    • Number of neurons recorded from each target per recording session, unless the axis was kinked or each session had zero neurons: [no. of neurons per session] (mean ± SD). Each recording session occurred after one or more axis was moved forward during a driving session. The units included were stable for at least three days during continuous recording periods.

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 5 (6)
eNeuro
Vol. 5, Issue 6
November/December 2018
  • 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.
The systemDrive: a Multisite, Multiregion Microdrive with Independent Drive Axis Angling for Chronic Multimodal Systems Neuroscience Recordings in Freely Behaving Animals
(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
The systemDrive: a Multisite, Multiregion Microdrive with Independent Drive Axis Angling for Chronic Multimodal Systems Neuroscience Recordings in Freely Behaving Animals
Myles W. Billard, Fatemeh Bahari, John Kimbugwe, Kevin D. Alloway, Bruce J. Gluckman
eNeuro 19 December 2018, 5 (6) ENEURO.0261-18.2018; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0261-18.2018

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
The systemDrive: a Multisite, Multiregion Microdrive with Independent Drive Axis Angling for Chronic Multimodal Systems Neuroscience Recordings in Freely Behaving Animals
Myles W. Billard, Fatemeh Bahari, John Kimbugwe, Kevin D. Alloway, Bruce J. Gluckman
eNeuro 19 December 2018, 5 (6) ENEURO.0261-18.2018; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0261-18.2018
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

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

Keywords

  • chronic
  • electrophysiology
  • freely behaving
  • microdrive
  • systems neuroscience
  • Tetrode

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

Methods/New Tools

  • Superficial Bound of the Depth Limit of Two-Photon Imaging in Mouse Brain
  • A Toolbox of Criteria for Distinguishing Cajal–Retzius Cells from Other Neuronal Types in the Postnatal Mouse Hippocampus
  • Assessment of Spontaneous Neuronal Activity In Vitro Using Multi-Well Multi-Electrode Arrays: Implications for Assay Development
Show more Methods/New Tools

Novel Tools and Methods

  • Superficial Bound of the Depth Limit of Two-Photon Imaging in Mouse Brain
  • A Toolbox of Criteria for Distinguishing Cajal–Retzius Cells from Other Neuronal Types in the Postnatal Mouse Hippocampus
  • Assessment of Spontaneous Neuronal Activity In Vitro Using Multi-Well Multi-Electrode Arrays: Implications for Assay Development
Show more Novel Tools and Methods

Subjects

  • Novel Tools and Methods
  • 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.