↓ Skip to main content

Quantitative differences in developmental profiles of spontaneous activity in cortical and hippocampal cultures

Overview of attention for article published in Neural Development, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quantitative differences in developmental profiles of spontaneous activity in cortical and hippocampal cultures
Published in
Neural Development, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13064-014-0028-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Charlesworth, Ellese Cotterill, Andrew Morton, Seth GN Grant, Stephen J Eglen

Abstract

BackgroundNeural circuits can spontaneously generate complex spatiotemporal firing patterns during development. This spontaneous activity is thought to help guide development of the nervous system. In this study, we had two aims. First, to characterise the changes in spontaneous activity in cultures of developing networks of either hippocampal or cortical neurons dissociated from mouse. Second, to assess whether there are any functional differences in the patterns of activity in hippocampal and cortical networks.ResultsWe used multielectrode arrays to record the development of spontaneous activity in cultured networks of either hippocampal or cortical neurons every 2 or 3 days for the first month after plating. Within a few days of culturing, networks exhibited spontaneous activity. This activity strengthened and then stabilised typically around 21 days in vitro. We quantified the activity patterns in hippocampal and cortical networks using 11 features. Three out of 11 features showed striking differences in activity between hippocampal and cortical networks: (1) interburst intervals are less variable in spike trains from hippocampal cultures; (2) hippocampal networks have higher correlations and (3) hippocampal networks generate more robust theta-bursting patterns. Machine-learning techniques confirmed that these differences in patterning are sufficient to classify recordings reliably at any given age as either hippocampal or cortical networks.ConclusionsAlthough cultured networks of hippocampal and cortical networks both generate spontaneous activity that changes over time, at any given time we can reliably detect differences in the activity patterns. We anticipate that this quantitative framework could have applications in many areas, including neurotoxicity testing and for characterising the phenotype of different mutant mice. All code and data relating to this report are freely available for others to use.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 124 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 20%
Student > Master 24 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 23 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 42 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 6%
Engineering 7 5%
Physics and Astronomy 3 2%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 29 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2022.
All research outputs
#13,081,382
of 23,053,169 outputs
Outputs from Neural Development
#85
of 226 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,792
of 354,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neural Development
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,169 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 226 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 354,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them