Back

A neuron model with unbalanced synaptic weights explains asymmetric effects of ketamine in auditory cortex

Lopez Jury, L.; Garcia Rosales, F.; Gonzalez Palomares, E.; Wetekam, J.; Hechavarria, J.

2022-06-15 neuroscience
10.1101/2022.06.12.495822 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Although new advances in neuroscience allow the study of vocal communication in awake animals, substantial progress in the processing of vocalizations has been made from brains of anaesthetized preparations. Thus, understanding how anaesthetics affect neuronal responses is of paramount importance. Here, we used electrophysiological recordings and computational modelling to study how the auditory cortex of bats responds to vocalizations under anaesthesia and in wakefulness. We found that multifunctional neurons that process echolocation and communication sounds were affected by ketamine anaesthesia in a manner that could not be predicted by known anaesthetic effects. In wakefulness, acoustic contexts (preceding echolocation or communication sequences) led to stimulus-specific suppression of lagging sounds, accentuating neuronal responses to sound transitions. However, under anaesthesia, communication contexts (but not echolocation) led to a global suppression of responses to lagging sounds. Such asymmetric effect was dependent on the frequency composition of the contexts and not on their temporal patterns. We constructed a neuron model that could replicate the data obtained in vivo. In the model, anaesthesia modulates spiking activity in a channel-specific manner, decreasing responses of cortical inputs tuned to high-frequency sounds and increasing adaptation in the respective cortical synapses. Combined, our findings obtained in vivo and in silico reveal that ketamine anaesthesia does not reduce uniformly the neurons responsiveness to low and high frequency sounds. This effect depends on combined mechanisms that unbalance cortical inputs and ultimately affect how auditory cortex neurons respond to natural sounds in anaesthetized preparations.

Matching journals

The top 5 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.