Probing scale interaction in brain dynamics through synchronization

The mammalian brain operates in multiple spatial scales simultaneously, ranging from the microscopic scale of single neurons through the mesoscopic scale of cortical columns, to the macroscopic scale of brain areas. These levels of description are associated with distinct temporal scales, ranging from milliseconds in the case of neurons to tens of seconds in the case of brain areas. Here, we examine theoretically how these spatial and temporal scales interact in the functioning brain, by considering the coupled behaviour of two mesoscopic neural masses (NMs) that communicate with each other through a microscopic neuronal network (NN). We use the synchronization between the two NM models as a tool to probe the interaction between the mesoscopic scales of those neural populations and the microscopic scale of the mediating NN. The two NM oscillators are taken to operate in a low-frequency regime with different peak frequencies (and distinct dynamical behaviour). The microscopic neuronal population, in turn, is described by a network of several thousand excitatory and inhibitory spiking neurons operating in a synchronous irregular regime, in which the individual neurons fire very sparsely but collectively give rise to a well-defined rhythm in the gamma range. Our results show that this NN, which operates at a fast temporal scale, is indeed sufficient to mediate coupling between the two mesoscopic oscillators, which evolve dynamically at a slower scale. We also establish how this synchronization depends on the topological properties of the microscopic NN, on its size and on its oscillation frequency.

[1]  W. J. Nowack Methods in Neuronal Modeling , 1991, Neurology.

[2]  Eugene M. Izhikevich,et al.  Dynamical Systems in Neuroscience: The Geometry of Excitability and Bursting , 2006 .

[3]  Gustavo Deco,et al.  Resting brains never rest: computational insights into potential cognitive architectures , 2013, Trends in Neurosciences.

[4]  Wulfram Gerstner,et al.  SPIKING NEURON MODELS Single Neurons , Populations , Plasticity , 2002 .

[5]  Olivier D. Faugeras,et al.  A Constructive Mean-Field Analysis of Multi-Population Neural Networks with Random Synaptic Weights and Stochastic Inputs , 2008, Front. Comput. Neurosci..

[6]  M. Ahissar,et al.  Dependence of cortical plasticity on correlated activity of single neurons and on behavioral context. , 1992, Science.

[7]  Jordi García-Ojalvo,et al.  Relating structural and functional anomalous connectivity in the aging brain via neural mass modeling , 2010, NeuroImage.

[8]  Gustavo Deco,et al.  Neurodynamical amplification of perceptual signals via system-size resonance , 2008 .

[9]  Frank Marten,et al.  Mappings between a macroscopic neural-mass model and a reduced conductance-based model , 2010, Biological Cybernetics.

[10]  P. Fries A mechanism for cognitive dynamics: neuronal communication through neuronal coherence , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A neural mass model for MEG/EEG: coupling and neuronal dynamics , 2003, NeuroImage.

[12]  Ben H. Jansen,et al.  Electroencephalogram and visual evoked potential generation in a mathematical model of coupled cortical columns , 1995, Biological Cybernetics.

[13]  Leonardo L. Gollo,et al.  Dynamic control for synchronization of separated cortical areas through thalamic relay , 2010, NeuroImage.

[14]  Peter Dayan,et al.  Theoretical Neuroscience: Computational and Mathematical Modeling of Neural Systems , 2001 .

[15]  Nicolas Brunel,et al.  Lapicque’s 1907 paper: from frogs to integrate-and-fire , 2007, Biological Cybernetics.

[16]  W Singer,et al.  Visual feature integration and the temporal correlation hypothesis. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.

[17]  Olivier D. Faugeras,et al.  Bifurcation Analysis of Jansen's Neural Mass Model , 2006, Neural Computation.

[18]  Nicolas Brunel,et al.  Encoding of Naturalistic Stimuli by Local Field Potential Spectra in Networks of Excitatory and Inhibitory Neurons , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[19]  Nicolas Brunel,et al.  Dynamics of Sparsely Connected Networks of Excitatory and Inhibitory Spiking Neurons , 2000, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[20]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[21]  Nelson J. Trujillo-Barreto,et al.  Realistically Coupled Neural Mass Models Can Generate EEG Rhythms , 2007, Neural Computation.

[22]  J. García-Ojalvo,et al.  Effects of noise in excitable systems , 2004 .

[23]  Karin Schwab,et al.  Modeling Brain Resonance Phenomena Using a Neural Mass Model , 2011, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[24]  Leonardo L. Gollo,et al.  Dynamical relaying can yield zero time lag neuronal synchrony despite long conduction delays , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  R. Yuste,et al.  The Brain Activity Map Project and the Challenge of Functional Connectomics , 2012, Neuron.

[26]  Jordi García-Ojalvo,et al.  Role of frequency mismatch in neuronal communication through coherence , 2014, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[27]  G. Ermentrout,et al.  Gamma rhythms and beta rhythms have different synchronization properties. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  J. M. Sancho,et al.  Emergent bimodal firing patterns implement different encoding strategies during gamma-band oscillations , 2012, Front. Comput. Neurosci..

[29]  D. Hansel,et al.  How Spike Generation Mechanisms Determine the Neuronal Response to Fluctuating Inputs , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.