Volume 14 Supplement 1

Abstracts from the Twenty Second Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting: CNS*2013

Open Access

The effects of time delays on synchronization properties in a network of neural mass models

BMC Neuroscience201314(Suppl 1):P78

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2202-14-S1-P78

Published: 8 July 2013

Patterns of (de)synchronization are key to neural functioning. We asked what general mechanisms are responsible for the emergence and disappearance of these (de)synchronization patterns. To answer this question we analytically revealed potential effects of physiologically motivated time delays in neural populations. We investigated a network of Neural Mass Models (NMM), here Freeman's seminal model that has successfully been used to model alpha-oscillations [1] and EEG activity in the olfactory system [2] and visual cortex [3]. In contrast to these local applications we were interested in distributed activities over larger networks and hence coupled arbitrarily many NMMs involving the aforementioned time delays. That is, we represented activity in distinct brain areas by means of oscillatory excitatory/inhibitory pairs and consider network behavior as representative for global brain activity.

We characterized synchronization as the appearance of clustered stationary phase probability density functions (PDFs). In general, this requires a phase dynamics description of the network, which can be established by applying a slowly varying amplitude approximation (see also [4]), together with a continuity equation covering the PDF's evolution. In fact we succeeded to show the existence of synchronized phase PDFs even for small inter area coupling strengths in the case of both zero and constant finite delays, whereas synchronization disappeared when delays were distributed throughout the network. Homogeneity of the effective coupling matrices (D) appearing in the phase dynamics equation is crucial in this respect as it is required for the existence of clustered phase PDFs. Loss of homogeneity in D can be caused by distributed delays as well as heterogeneity in the structural coupling matrix, leading to the conclusion that the mechanism modulating desynchronization is equal for both cases.

The effect of distributed delays is consistent with analytic results in phase oscillator systems [5, 6]. This also holds for the drop in oscillation frequency for increased time delay values [5, 7] that we observed in simulation results. These two findings validate the description of network behavior in terms of its phase dynamics.

In biologically more realistic networks time delays have been shown to determine network synchronization properties in a similar way [8]. Furthermore delays have turned out to be crucial in the behavior of resting state networks [9]. Our results suggest that structural heterogeneity may be compensated for by an appropriate distribution of time delays, thereby explaining the necessity of time delays in RSNs to establish biological plausible synchronization patterns.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Research Institute MOVE, VU University
(2)
Theoretical and Computational Neuroscience Group, Center for Brain and Cognition, Universitat Pompeu Fabra

References

  1. Lopes da Silva FH, Hoeks A, Smits H, Zetterberg LH: Model of brain rythm activity: the alpha-rhythm of the thalamus. Kybernetik. 1974, 15: 27-37. 10.1007/BF00270757.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Freeman WJ: Simulation of chaotic EEG patterns with a dynamic model of the olfactory system. Biological Cybernetics. 1987, 56: 139-150. 10.1007/BF00317988.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Jansen BH, Rit VG: Electroencephalogram and visual evoked potential generation in a mathematical model of coupled cortical columns. Biological Cybernetics. 1995, 73: 357-366. 10.1007/BF00199471.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Daffertshofer A, Van Wijk BCM: On the influence of amplitude on the connectivity between phases. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics. 2011, 5: 10.3389/fninf.2011.00006Google Scholar
  5. Choi MY, Kim HJ, Kim D, Hong H: Synchronization in a system of globally coupled oscillators with time delay. Phys Rev E. 2000, 61: 371-381. 10.1103/PhysRevE.61.371.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Lee WS, Ott E, Antonsen TM: Large Coupled Oscillator Systems with Heterogeneous Interaction Delays. Phys Rev Lett. 2009, 103: 04410-Google Scholar
  7. Kim S, Park SH, Ryu CS: Multistability in Coupled Oscillator Systems with Time Delay. Phys Rev Lett. 1997, 79: 2911-2914. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.79.2911.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Deco G, Jirsa VK, McIntosh AR, Sporns O, Kötter R: Key role of coupling, delay, and noise in resting brain fluctuations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2009, 106: 10302-10307. 10.1073/pnas.0901831106.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Deco G, Jirsa VK: Ongoing Cortical Activity at Rest: Criticality, Multistability, and Ghost Attractors. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2012, 32: 3366-3375. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2523-11.2012.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Ton et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement