Back

Taxonomy of neural oscillation events in primate auditory cortex

Neymotin, S. A.; Barczak, A.; O'Connell, M. N.; McGinnis, T.; Markowitz, N.; Espinal, E.; Griffith, E.; Anwar, H.; Dura-Bernal, S.; Lytton, W. W.; Jones, S. R.; Bickel, S.; Lakatos, P.

2020-04-18 neuroscience
10.1101/2020.04.16.045021 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Electrophysiological oscillations in the brain have been shown to occur as multi-cycle events, with onset and offset dependent on behavioral and cognitive state. To provide a baseline for state-related and task-related events, we quantified oscillation features in resting-state recordings. We used two invasively-recorded electrophysiology datasets: one from human, and one from non-human primate auditory system. After removing incidentally occuring event related potentials, we used a wavelet transform based method to quantify oscillation features. We identified about 2 million oscillation events, classified within traditional frequency bands: delta, theta, alpha, beta, low gamma, gamma, high gamma. Oscillation events of 1-44 cycles were present in at least one frequency band in 90% of the time in human and non-human primate recordings. Individual oscillation events were characterized by non-constant frequency and amplitude. This result naturally contrasts with prior studies which assumed such constancy, but is consistent with evidence from event-associated oscillations. We measured oscillation event duration, frequency span, and waveform shape. Oscillations tended to exhibit multiple cycles per event, verifiable by comparing filtered to unfiltered waveforms. In addition to the clear intra-event rhythmicity, there was also evidence of inter-event rhythmicity within bands, demonstrated by finding that coefficient of variation of interval distributions and Fano Factor measures differed significantly from a Poisson distribution assumption. Overall, our study demonstrates that rhythmic, multi-cycle oscillation events dominate auditory cortical dynamics.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.