Advertisement

Biological Cybernetics

, Volume 66, Issue 5, pp 381–387 | Cite as

Reduction of conductance-based neuron models

  • Thomas B. Kepler
  • L. F. Abbott
  • Eve Marder
Article

Abstract

We present a scheme for systematically reducing the number of differential equations required for biophysically realistic neuron models. The techniques are general, are designed to be applicable to a large set of such models and retain in the reduced system as high a degree of fidelity to the original system as possible. As examples, we provide reductions of the Hodgkin-Huxley system and the A-current model of Connor et al. (1977).

Keywords

Differential Equation Original System Neuron Model Realistic Neuron Realistic Neuron Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abbott LF, Kepler TB (1990) Model neurons: from Hodgkin-Huxley to Hopfield. In: Garrido L (ed) Statistical mechanics of neural networks. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Buchholtz F, Golowasch J, Epstein IR, Marder E (1992) The contribution of individual ionic currents to the activity of a model stomatogastric ganglion neuron J Neurophysiol (in press)Google Scholar
  3. Connor JA, Walter D, McKown R (1977) Neural repetitive firing: modifications of the Hodgkin-Huxley axon suggested by experimental results from crustacean axons. Biophys J 18:81–102Google Scholar
  4. FitzHugh R (1961) Impulses and physiological states in models of nerve membrane. Biophys J 1:445–466Google Scholar
  5. Golowasch J, Buchholtz F, Epstein IR, Marder E (1992) A mathematical model of an identified stomatogastric ganglion neuron J Neurophysiol (in press)Google Scholar
  6. Hindmarsh JL, Rose RM (1982) A model of the nerve impulse using two first-order differential equations. Nature 296:162–164Google Scholar
  7. Hodgkin AL, Huxley AF (1952) A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. J Physiol 117:500Google Scholar
  8. Hopfield JJ (1982) Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proc Natl Acad Sci79:2554Google Scholar
  9. Krinskii VI and Kokoz YM (1973) Analysis of equations of excitable membranes — 1. Reduction of the Hodgkin-Huxley equations to a second-order system. Biofizika 18:506–511Google Scholar
  10. Lapicque L (1907) Recherches quantitatives sur l'excitation électrique des nerfs traitée comme une polarization. J Physiol Pathol Gen 9:620–635Google Scholar
  11. McCulloch WS, Pitts W (1943) A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bull Math Biophys 5:114–133Google Scholar
  12. Rinzel J (1985) Excitation dynamics: insights from simplified membrane models. Fed Proc 44:2944–2946Google Scholar
  13. Rose RM, Hindmarsh JL (1989) The assembly of ionic currents in a thalamic neuron I. The three-dimensional model. Proc R Soc Lond 237:267Google Scholar
  14. Yamada WM, Koch C, Adams PR (1989) Multiple channels and calcium dynamics. In methods of neuronal modeling. In: Koch C, Segev I (eds) From synapses to networks. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas B. Kepler
    • 1
  • L. F. Abbott
    • 2
  • Eve Marder
    • 1
  1. 1.Departments of BiologyBrandeis UniversityWalthamUSA
  2. 2.Department of Physics and The Center for Complex SystemsBrandeis UniversityWalthamUSA

Personalised recommendations