» Articles » PMID: 33109632

Complementary Effects of Adaptation and Gain Control on Sound Encoding in Primary Auditory Cortex

Overview
Journal eNeuro
Specialty Neurology
Date 2020 Oct 28
PMID 33109632
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

An important step toward understanding how the brain represents complex natural sounds is to develop accurate models of auditory coding by single neurons. A commonly used model is the linear-nonlinear spectro-temporal receptive field (STRF; LN model). The LN model accounts for many features of auditory tuning, but it cannot account for long-lasting effects of sensory context on sound-evoked activity. Two mechanisms that may support these contextual effects are short-term plasticity (STP) and contrast-dependent gain control (GC), which have inspired expanded versions of the LN model. Both models improve performance over the LN model, but they have never been compared directly. Thus, it is unclear whether they account for distinct processes or describe one phenomenon in different ways. To address this question, we recorded activity of neurons in primary auditory cortex (A1) of awake ferrets during presentation of natural sounds. We then fit models incorporating one nonlinear mechanism (GC or STP) or both (GC+STP) using this single dataset, and measured the correlation between the models' predictions and the recorded neural activity. Both the STP and GC models performed significantly better than the LN model, but the GC+STP model outperformed both individual models. We also quantified the equivalence of STP and GC model predictions and found only modest similarity. Consistent results were observed for a dataset collected in clean and noisy acoustic contexts. These results establish general methods for evaluating the equivalence of arbitrarily complex encoding models and suggest that the STP and GC models describe complementary processes in the auditory system.

Citing Articles

Short-term neuronal and synaptic plasticity act in synergy for deviance detection in spiking networks.

Kern F, Chao Z PLoS Comput Biol. 2023; 19(10):e1011554.

PMID: 37831721 PMC: 10599548. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011554.


A convolutional neural network provides a generalizable model of natural sound coding by neural populations in auditory cortex.

Pennington J, David S PLoS Comput Biol. 2023; 19(5):e1011110.

PMID: 37146065 PMC: 10191263. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011110.


Quantitative models of auditory cortical processing.

Sadagopan S, Kar M, Parida S Hear Res. 2023; 429:108697.

PMID: 36696724 PMC: 9928778. DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2023.108697.


Deep neural networks effectively model neural adaptation to changing background noise and suggest nonlinear noise filtering methods in auditory cortex.

Mischler G, Keshishian M, Bickel S, Mehta A, Mesgarani N Neuroimage. 2022; 266:119819.

PMID: 36529203 PMC: 10510744. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119819.


Targeted dimensionality reduction enables reliable estimation of neural population coding accuracy from trial-limited data.

Heller C, David S PLoS One. 2022; 17(7):e0271136.

PMID: 35862300 PMC: 9302847. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271136.


References
1.
Wehr M, Zador A . Synaptic mechanisms of forward suppression in rat auditory cortex. Neuron. 2005; 47(3):437-45. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.06.009. View

2.
Sharpee T, Atencio C, Schreiner C . Hierarchical representations in the auditory cortex. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2011; 21(5):761-7. PMC: 3223290. DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2011.05.027. View

3.
Hsu A, Borst A, Theunissen F . Quantifying variability in neural responses and its application for the validation of model predictions. Network. 2004; 15(2):91-109. View

4.
Aertsen A, Johannesma P . The spectro-temporal receptive field. A functional characteristic of auditory neurons. Biol Cybern. 1981; 42(2):133-43. DOI: 10.1007/BF00336731. View

5.
Kowalski N, Depireux D, Shamma S . Analysis of dynamic spectra in ferret primary auditory cortex. I. Characteristics of single-unit responses to moving ripple spectra. J Neurophysiol. 1996; 76(5):3503-23. DOI: 10.1152/jn.1996.76.5.3503. View