Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Oct 23.
Published in final edited form as: ACS Nano. 2018 Sep 12;12(10):10419–10429. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.8b06014

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Comparison of in vivo signal recorded on Ti3C2 and Au electrodes intracortically. (A) Schematics of an intracortical electrode array with five Ti3C2–Au stereotrode pairs. The array was inserted into the cortex and advanced in approximately 500 μm steps to a depth of 2 mm while recording. (B) Multi-unit spiking activity observed on the distal three pairs of electrodes in the array at three different recording depths. Spikes that were observed simultaneously on adjacent Ti3C2 and Au contacts are indicated by blue dots. Spikes unique to a given electrode are indicated by orange dots. (C) Histogram of SNRMXene–SNRAu for the common spikes on the adjacent electrodes outlined in blue boxes in panel B. In all cases, the distribution mean was significantly greater than zero (permutation tests, p < 0.001), indicating higher SNR on Ti3C2 contacts compared to Au. (D) Number of unique spikes seen on adjacent Ti3C2 and Au electrodes. In all cases, more unique spikes were observed on Ti3C2 contacts, indicating that these electrodes were more sensitive for recording unit activity than Au electrodes.