Journal of Computational Neuroscience

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 359–375 | Cite as

Firing-rate models capture essential response dynamics of LGN relay cells

  • Thomas HeibergEmail author
  • Birgit Kriener
  • Tom Tetzlaff
  • Alex Casti
  • Gaute T. Einevoll
  • Hans E. Plesser


Firing-rate models provide a practical tool for studying signal processing in the early visual system, permitting more thorough mathematical analysis than spike-based models. We show here that essential response properties of relay cells in the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) can be captured by surprisingly simple firing-rate models consisting of a low-pass filter and a nonlinear activation function. The starting point for our analysis are two spiking neuron models based on experimental data: a spike-response model fitted to data from macaque (Carandini et al. J. Vis., 20(14), 1–2011, 2007), and a model with conductance-based synapses and afterhyperpolarizing currents fitted to data from cat (Casti et al. J. Comput. Neurosci., 24(2), 235–252, 2008). We obtained the nonlinear activation function by stimulating the model neurons with stationary stochastic spike trains, while we characterized the linear filter by fitting a low-pass filter to responses to sinusoidally modulated stochastic spike trains. To account for the non-Poisson nature of retinal spike trains, we performed all analyses with spike trains with higher-order gamma statistics in addition to Poissonian spike trains. Interestingly, the properties of the low-pass filter depend only on the average input rate, but not on the modulation depth of sinusoidally modulated input. Thus, the response properties of our model are fully specified by just three parameters (low-frequency gain, cutoff frequency, and delay) for a given mean input rate and input regularity. This simple firing-rate model reproduces the response of spiking neurons to a step in input rate very well for Poissonian as well as for non-Poissonian input. We also found that the cutoff frequencies, and thus the filter time constants, of the rate-based model are unrelated to the membrane time constants of the underlying spiking models, in agreement with similar observations for simpler models.


LGN Retina Visual system Rate model Linear-nonlinear model 



We would like to thank Matteo Carandini for valuable discussions on how to replicate his model and two anonymous referees for constructive comments.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10827_2013_456_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (493 kb)
(PDF 493 kb)


  1. Blitz, D.M., & Regehr, W.G. (2005). Timing and specificity of feed-forward inhibition within the L.G.N. Neuron, 45(6), 917–928.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown, E.N., Barbieri, R., Ventura, V., Kass, R.E., Frank, L.M. (2002). The time-rescaling theorem and its application to neural spike train data analysis. Neural Computation, 14(2), 325–346.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brunel, N., Chance, F.S., Fourcaud, N., Abbott, L.F. (2001). Effects of synaptic noise and filtering on the frequency response of spiking neurons. Physical Review Letters, 86(10), 2186–2189.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carandini, M., Horton, J.C., Sincich, L.C. (2007). Thalamic filtering of retinal spike trains by postsynaptic summation. Journal of Vision, 20(14), 1–2011.Google Scholar
  5. Casti, A., Hayot, F., Xiao, Y., Kaplan, E. (2008). A simple model of retina-LGN transmission. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 24(2), 235–252.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chichilnisky, E.J. (2001). A simple white noise analysis of neuronal light responses. Network, 12(2), 199–213.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cleland, B.G., Dubin, M.W., Levick, W.R. (1971). Simultaneous recording of input and output of lateral geniculate neurones. Nature New Biology, 231(23), 191–192.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dayan, P., & Abbott, L.F. (2001). Theoretical neuroscience. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
  9. Deger, M., Helias, M., Cardanobile, S., Atay, F.M., Rotter, S. (2010). Nonequilibrium dynamics of stochastic point processes with refractoriness. Physical Review E, 82(2 Pt 1), 021–129.Google Scholar
  10. Einevoll, G.T., & Heggelund, P. (2000). Mathematical models for the spatial receptive-field organization of nonlagged X-cells in dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus of cat. Visual Neuroscience, 17(6), 871–885.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Einevoll, G.T., & Plesser, H.E. (2002). Linear mechanistic models for the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus of cat probed using drifting-grating stimuli. Network, 13(4), 503–530.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Franklin, J., & Bair, W. (1995). The effect of a refractory period on the power spectrum of neuronal discharge. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 55, 1074–1093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Galassi, M., Davies, J., Theiler, J., Gough, B., Jungman, G., Booth, M., Rossi, F. (2001). GNU scientific library reference manual. Bristol: Network Theory.Google Scholar
  14. Gerstner, W. (2000). Population dynamics of spiking neurons: fast transients, asynchronous states, and locking. Neural Computation, 12(1), 43–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gerstner, W., & Kistler, W.M. (2002). Spiking neuron models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gewaltig, M.O., & Diesmann, M. (2007). NEST (NEural simulation tool). Scholarpedia, 2(4), 1430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goldberg, J.M., & Brown, P.B. (1969). Response of binaural neurons of dog superior olivary complex to dichotic tonal stimuli: Some physiological mechanisms of sound localization. Journal of Neurophysiology, 32, 613–636.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hayot, F., & Tranchina, D. (2001). Modeling corticofugal feedback and the sensitivity of lateral geniculate neurons to orientation discontinuity. Visual Neuroscience, 18(6), 865–877.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Johannesma, P.I.M. (1968). Diffusion models for the stochastic activity of neurons. In E.R. Caianiello (Ed.), Networks neural: Proceedings of the school on neural networks (pp. 116–144). Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  20. Kaplan, E., & Shapley, R. (1984). The origin of the S (slow) potential in the mammalian lateral geniculate nucleus. Experimental Brain Research, 55(1), 111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kirkland, K.L., & Gerstein, G.L. (1998). A model of cortically induced synchronization in the lateral geniculate nucleus of the cat: a role for low-threshold calcium channels. Vision Research, 38(13), 2007–2022.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Knight, B.W. (1972). Dynamics of encoding in a population of neurons. The Journal of General Physiology, 59(6), 734–766.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Köhn, J., & Wörgötter, F. (1996). Corticofugal feedback can reduce the visual latency of responses to antagonistic stimuli. Biological Cybernetics, 75(3), 199–209.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Muller, E., Davison, A.P., Brizzi, T., Bruederle, D., Eppler, J.M., Kremkow, J., Pecevski, D., Perrinet, L., Schmuker, M., Yger, P. (2009). NeuralEnsemble.Org: Unifying neural simulators in Python to ease the model complexity bottleneck. In Frontiers in neuroscience conference abstract: Neuroinformatics 2009.Google Scholar
  25. Nelder, J.A., & Mead, R. (1965). A simplex method for function minimization. Computer Journal, 7, 308–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nordbø, Ø., Wyller, J., Einevoll, G.T. (2007). Neural network firing-rate models on integral form: effects of temporal coupling kernels on equilibrium-state stability. Biological Cybernetics, 97(3), 195–209.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nordlie, E., Gewaltig, M.O., Plesser, H.E. (2009). Towards reproducible descriptions of neuronal network models. PLoS Computational Biology, 5(8), e1000456.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nordlie, E., Tetzlaff, T., Einevoll, G.T. (2010). Rate dynamics of leaky integrate-and-fire neurons with strong synapses. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 4, 149.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Pillow, J.W., Paninski, L., Uzzell, V.J., Simoncelli, E.P., Chichilnisky, E.J. (2005). Prediction and decoding of retinal ganglion cell responses with a probabilistic spiking model. Journal of Neuroscience, 25(47), 11003–11013.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pillow, J.W., Shlens, J., Paninski, L., Sher, A., Litke, A.M., Chichilnisky, E.J., Simoncelli, E.P. (2008). Spatio-temporal correlations and visual signalling in a complete neuronal population. Nature, 454(7207), 995–999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Plesser, H.E., & Diesmann, M. (2009). Simplicity and efficiency of integrate-and-fire neuron models. Neural Computation, 21, 353–359.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rodieck, R.W. (1965). Quantitative analysis of cat retinal ganglion cell response to visual stimuli. Vision Research, 5(11), 583–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rotter, S., & Diesmann, M. (1999). Exact digital simulation of time-invariant linear systems with applications to neuronal modeling. Biological Cybernetics, 81(5–6), 381–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sherman, S.M., & Guillery, R.W. (2001). Exploring the thalamus. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  35. Shimazaki, H., & Shinomoto, S. (2010). Kernel bandwidth optimization in spike rate estimation. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 29(1–2), 171–182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sirovich, L. (2008). Populations of tightly coupled neurons: the RGC/LGN system. Neural Computation, 20(5), 1179–1210.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Troy, J.B., & Robson, J.G. (1992). Steady discharges of X and Y retinal ganglion cells of cat under photopic illuminance. Visual neuroscience, 9(6), 535–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. van Hateren, J.H. (1997). Processing of natural time series of intensities by the visual system of the blowfly. Vision Research, 37(23), 3407–3416.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Walpole, R.E., & Myers, R.H. (1993). Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists (5th Ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  40. Wilson, H.R., & Cowan, J.D. (1972). Excitatory and inhibitory interactions in localized populations of model neurons. Biophysical Journal, 12(1), 1–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yousif, N., & Denham, M. (2007). The role of cortical feedback in the generation of the temporal receptive field responses of lateral geniculate nucleus neurons: a computational modelling study. Biological Cybernetics, 97(4), 269–277.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Heiberg
    • 1
    Email author
  • Birgit Kriener
    • 1
  • Tom Tetzlaff
    • 2
  • Alex Casti
    • 3
  • Gaute T. Einevoll
    • 1
  • Hans E. Plesser
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mathematical Sciences and TechnologyNorwegian University of Life SciencesÅsNorway
  2. 2.Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-6), Research Center JülichJülichGermany
  3. 3.Department of Mathematics, Gildart-Haase School of Computer Sciences and EngineeringFairleigh Dickinson UniversityTeaneckUSA

Personalised recommendations