Table 1:
Comparison of using electrical, optical, and chemical manipulation and recording of neuronal activity.
| Modality | Spatial resolution | Temporal resolution | Sensitivity | Selectivity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Electrical stimulation | Limited by current spreading and electrode dimensions | Sub-microsecond | Highly tunable | Limited ‒all cells surrounding probe experience field |
| Electrical recording | <10 μm | Sub-microsecond | >10 μV | Limited - pharmacology required to determine contributors to current |
| Optical stimulation | Single cell optical stimulation144 | Sub-microsecond | Highly tunable by irradiation power, wavelength, etc. | High; only light-sensitive reporters will respond |
| Optical recording | Single cell145 | Sub-microsecond; can record single action potentials | Limited by available reporters | High; selective biosensors for neurotransmitters and analytes have been developed |
| FSCV | >100 μm limited by large devices required | ≥100 ms | Can detect electroactive molecules over large concentration range | Moderate; care must be taken to validate electrochemical signatures of recording |
| Microdialysis | >150 μm limited by large size of probes | Seconds to minutes | Sensitivity towards a large range of analytes | High; defined by high- resolution chemical analytics89 |
| Chemical stimulation | Limited by diffusion | Seconds to minutes; dictated by diffusion and metabolism | Moderate; tunable through dose applied | High; can be fine-tuned using synthetic chemistry |
| Chemical recording | Single-cell109 | Sub-microsecond110 | Excellent; can be fine-tuned using synthetic chemistry | High ‒ can be fine-tuned using synthetic chemistry |