z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
A comparison of computational methods for detecting bursts in neuronal spike trains and their application to human stem cell-derived neuronal networks
Author(s) -
Ellese Cotterill,
Paul Charlesworth,
Christopher W. Thomas,
Ole Paulsen,
Stephen J. Eglen
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of neurophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.302
H-Index - 245
eISSN - 1522-1598
pISSN - 0022-3077
DOI - 10.1152/jn.00093.2016
Subject(s) - spike (software development) , neuroscience , spike train , computer science , train , artificial intelligence , psychology , geography , cartography , software engineering
Accurate identification of bursting activity is an essential element in the characterization of neuronal network activity. Despite this, no one technique for identifying bursts in spike trains has been widely adopted. Instead, many methods have been developed for the analysis of bursting activity, often on an ad hoc basis. Here we provide an unbiased assessment of the effectiveness of eight of these methods at detecting bursts in a range of spike trains. We suggest a list of features that an ideal burst detection technique should possess and use synthetic data to assess each method in regard to these properties. We further employ each of the methods to reanalyze microelectrode array (MEA) recordings from mouse retinal ganglion cells and examine their coherence with bursts detected by a human observer. We show that several common burst detection techniques perform poorly at analyzing spike trains with a variety of properties. We identify four promising burst detection techniques, which are then applied to MEA recordings of networks of human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived neurons and used to describe the ontogeny of bursting activity in these networks over several months of development. We conclude that no current method can provide "perfect" burst detection results across a range of spike trains; however, two burst detection techniques, the MaxInterval and logISI methods, outperform compared with others. We provide recommendations for the robust analysis of bursting activity in experimental recordings using current techniques.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom