Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2019 Dec 12;9:18924. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-55045-6

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© The Author(s) 2019

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

PMC Copyright notice

Afferent responses are dependent on iDC stimulation amplitude. (A) CV and spontaneous rate distribution of the analyzed population. There was an inverse correlation between CV and spontaneous rate (Pearson’s; r = −0.7850; p < 0.0001; n = 21 recordings). (B) Individual (grey) and population (black) spike rates in response to anodic (+) and cathodic (−) 2 s-long iDC steps. iDC stimulation resulted in a change of the mean spike rate (Friedman; p < 0.0001; n = 21 recordings). Compared to the spontaneous spike rate (at 0 µA stimulus intensity), the anodic current steps reduced the spike rate, whereas cathodic current increased the spike rate. (C) CV and maximal spike rate change distribution of the analyzed recordings. Increased CV correlated to an increased maximal spike rate change (Pearson’s; r = 0.4879; p = 0.0248; n = 21 recordings) but this was not significant if the high CV outlier (circled) was excluded (p = 0.3182; n = 20 recordings). (D) Individual (grey) and population (black) spike rate change in response to anodic (+) and cathodic (−) iDC steps. Change in spike rate also varied significantly with change in amplitude (Friedman; p < 0.0001; n = 21 recordings). Cathodic iDC steps elicited a greater absolute spike rate change on average than anodic iDC steps (Wilcoxon; p < 0.0001; n = 21 recordings). Error bars are ± SEM. Dotted line at CV = 0.1 in (A,C) shows the cutoff between regular and irregular cells²¹.