A method for analysis of encoding of stimulus separation in ensembles of afferents

This paper describes a new method for the analysis of ensemble coding in populations of receptor afferents. The method is based on principal component analysis (PCA) combined with algorithms for calculation of stimulus separation (discrimination). It allows a quantification of the ability of ensembles of afferents to discriminate between stimuli of different intensity, and it can also be used to calculate to which extent each afferent in an ensemble contributes to the discrimination. Since the emphasis is put on discrimination of stimuli rather than on similarities between the representations of the stimulus in the ensemble response and the stimulus itself, it involves no implicit assumption about the unknown decoding mechanisms in the CNS. Examples of results obtained with analysis of and comparison of simultaneously recorded and pooled sequentially recorded populations of primary muscle spindle afferents are given. These results support some of the general arguments in favour of the ensemble coding theory, and indicate that the results of studies made on populations of simultaneously recorded receptor afferents may differ considerably from results obtained in studies on pooled sequentially recorded afferents. In contrast to when ensemble responses are based on parallel recordings, population responses constructed from sequential recordings will be distorted as a result of unavoidable temporal variations in physiological conditions.

[1]  Per Sjölander,et al.  Reflex actions on the γ-muscle-spindle systems of muscles acting at the knee joint elicited by stretch of the posterior cruciate ligament , 1989 .

[2]  H. Johansson Rubrospinal and rubrobulbospinal influences on dynamic and static γ-motoneurones , 1988, Behavioural Brain Research.

[3]  H. Johansson,et al.  Fusimotor reflex profiles of individual triceps surae primary muscle spindle afferents assessed with multi-afferent recording technique. , 1991, Journal de physiologie.

[4]  M. Djupsjöbacka,et al.  Analysis of Encoding of Stimulus Separation in Ensembles of Muscle Afferents , 1995 .

[5]  S. W. Kuffler,et al.  Stretch receptor discharges during muscle contraction , 1951, The Journal of physiology.

[6]  M. Bergenheim,et al.  A multichannel hook electrode for simultaneous recording of up to 12 nerve filaments , 1994, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[7]  B. Matthews Nerve endings in mammalian muscle , 1933, The Journal of physiology.

[8]  Gernot S. Doetsch,et al.  Coding of stimulus location and intensity in populations of mechanosensitive nerve fibers of the raccoon: I. Single fiber response properties , 1990, Brain Research Bulletin.

[9]  S. Wold Cross-Validatory Estimation of the Number of Components in Factor and Principal Components Models , 1978 .

[10]  C. Hunt,et al.  Effects of stimulating the lumbar sympathetic trunk on cat hindlimb muscle spindles. , 1982, Archives italiennes de biologie.

[11]  I. A. Boyd,et al.  Composition of peripheral nerves , 1968 .

[12]  C. Hunt,et al.  RELATION OF FUNCTION TO DIAMETER IN AFFERENT FIBERS OF MUSCLE NERVES , 1954, The Journal of general physiology.

[13]  S. Wold,et al.  SIMCA: A Method for Analyzing Chemical Data in Terms of Similarity and Analogy , 1977 .

[14]  H Johansson,et al.  Fusimotor reflexes influencing secondary muscle spindle afferents from flexor and extensor muscles in the hind limb of the cat. , 1991, Journal de physiologie.

[15]  M. Hulliger,et al.  The mammalian muscle spindle and its central control. , 1984, Reviews of physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology.

[16]  A. Taylor,et al.  Alpha and Gamma Motor Systems , 1995, Springer US.

[17]  R. Erickson,et al.  Stimulus coding in topographic and nontopographic afferent modalities: on the significance of the activity of individual sensory neurons. , 1968, Psychological review.