Noninvasive neuromagnetic single-trial analysis of human neocortical population spikes

Neuronal spiking is commonly recorded by invasive sharp microelectrodes, whereas standard noninvasive macroapproaches (e.g., electroencephalography [EEG] and magnetoencephalography [MEG]) predominantly represent mass postsynaptic potentials. A notable exception are low-amplitude high-frequency (∼600...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS Vol. 118; no. 11
Main Authors Waterstraat, Gunnar, Körber, Rainer, Storm, Jan-Hendrik, Curio, Gabriel
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States National Academy of Sciences 16.03.2021
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Neuronal spiking is commonly recorded by invasive sharp microelectrodes, whereas standard noninvasive macroapproaches (e.g., electroencephalography [EEG] and magnetoencephalography [MEG]) predominantly represent mass postsynaptic potentials. A notable exception are low-amplitude high-frequency (∼600 Hz) somatosensory EEG/MEG responses that can represent population spikes when averaged over hundreds of trials to raise the signal-to-noise ratio. Here, a recent leap in MEG technology-featuring a factor 10 reduction in white noise level compared with standard systems-is leveraged to establish an effective single-trial portrayal of evoked cortical population spike bursts in healthy human subjects. This time-resolved approach proved instrumental in revealing a significant trial-to-trial variability of burst amplitudes as well as time-correlated (∼10 s) fluctuations of burst response latencies. Thus, ultralow-noise MEG enables noninvasive single-trial analyses of human cortical population spikes concurrent with low-frequency mass postsynaptic activity and thereby could comprehensively characterize cortical processing, potentially also in diseases not amenable to invasive microelectrode recordings.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Edited by Peter L. Strick, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, and approved February 9, 2021 (received for review August 17, 2020)
Author contributions: G.W., R.K., J.-H.S., and G.C. designed research; G.W., R.K., J.-H.S., and G.C. performed research; R.K. and J.-H.S. contributed new reagents/analytic tools; G.W., R.K., and G.C. analyzed data; and G.W., R.K., J.-H.S., and G.C. wrote the paper.
1G.W. and R.K. contributed equally to this work.
ISSN:0027-8424
1091-6490
DOI:10.1073/pnas.2017401118