Cited by 640Neural dynamics and brain functionVisual perception and processing mechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Decorrelated neuronal firing in cortical microcircuits

Ecker, Alexander S., Berens, Philipp, Keliris, Georgios A., Bethge, Matthias, Logothetis, Nikos K., Tolias, Andreas S.·2010·Science

Abstract

Correlated trial-to-trial variability in the activity of cortical neurons is thought to reflect the functional connectivity of the circuit. Many cortical areas are organized into functional columns, in which neurons are believed to be densely connected and to share common input. Numerous studies report a high degree of correlated variability between nearby cells. We developed chronically implanted multitetrode arrays offering unprecedented recording quality to reexamine this question in the primary visual cortex of awake macaques. We found that even nearby neurons with similar orientation tuning show virtually no correlated variability. Our findings suggest a refinement of current models of cortical microcircuit architecture and function: Either adjacent neurons share only a few percent of their inputs or, alternatively, their activity is actively decorrelated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1179867

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Changes in arousal, attentional state, and neuronal excitability modulate the level of correlated variability in sensory cortex.

    “Further, changes in arousal, attentional state and neuronal excitability modulate the level of correlated variability in sensory cortex (Cohen and Maunsell, 2009; Ecker et al., 2010; Ecker and Tolias, 2014; Goris et al., 2014; I-Chun et al., 2015; Mitchell et al., 2009).”

    From Waking state: rapid variations modulate neural and behavioral responses (2015) · cites this paper as Ecker et al., 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ecker, A. S., Berens, P., Keliris, G. A., Bethge, M., Logothetis, N. K., & Tolias, A. S.
Affiliations
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
  • Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics (DE)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Tolias, Andreas S.
Venue
Science
Published
2010-01-29
Volume
327
Issue
5965
Pages
584-587
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2145264576
Cited by
640
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 59 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 55 · 2014: 51 · 2013: 63 · 2012: 41
FWCI
36.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Eye Institute (R01EY018847)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
decorrelation, cortical microcircuits, primary visual cortex, orientation tuning, trial-to-trial variability, functional connectivity, shared inputs, macaque
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Electrodes, Implanted, Macaca mulatta, Models, Neurological, Nerve Net, Neurons, Photic Stimulation, Synapses, Visual Cortex, Visual Pathways

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review