% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@INPROCEEDINGS{Gutzen:885608,
author = {Gutzen, Robin and De Bonis, Giulia and Pastorelli, Elena
and Capone, Cristiano and De Luca, Chiara and Mattheisen,
Glynis and Allegra Mascaro, Anna Letizia and Resta,
Francesco and Pavone, Francesco Saverio and Sanchez-Vives,
Maria V. and Mattia, Maurizio and Grün, Sonja and Davison,
Andrew and Paolucci, Pier Stanislao and Denker, Michael},
title = {{B}uilding adaptable and reusable pipelines for
investigating the features of slow cortical rhythms across
scales, methods, and species},
reportid = {FZJ-2020-03960},
year = {2020},
abstract = {Making progress in neuroscience is increasingly a
collaborative effort that requires insights obtained across
data, methodologies, and models. For various spatial and
temporal scales, there exist sophisticated analysis
approaches capturing the observed phenomena. These puzzle
pieces must eventually be properly related to one another
and integrated to frame the research in a coherent picture.
In this process, often three questions arise: How to make
results comparable? How to relate complementary, yet
different methodological approaches to one another? How to
incorporate and validate models based on these findings?A
prominent example of such a scenario are slow cortical waves
which are persistently observed in sleeping and anesthetized
subjects of various species and across various measurement
techniques [1,2], as well as being expressed by various
models. While slow waves are an ubiquitous phenomenon with a
rich literature basis, and have been proposed to be the
default activity pattern of the cortical network [3], the
diversity of the experimental data and the numerous
different analytical methods, tools, and even terminologies
makes it next to impossible to rigorously compare and
interrelate results from the various sources to form a
coherent understanding.Here, we present an analysis pipeline
for the study of slow wave dynamics to support quantitative,
statistical comparisons of analysis results across data
sources and algorithms. A key concept of the pipeline is
modularity at the correct level of granularity to flexibly
adapt, reuse, and extend it to a wide range of datasets, and
research questions. In the spirit of reproducibility,
individual analysis blocks are built on open-source software
tools, e.g., the workflow manager Snakemake
$(RRID:SCR_003475),$ the Neo $(RRID:SCR_000634)$ library for
data representation [4], and the Elephant
$(RRID:SCR_003833)$ analysis toolbox.This pipeline design
enables multi-scale analyses of measured slow wave activity,
which we demonstrate using ECoG [5,6] and Calcium Imaging
[7] data of anesthetized mice. Furthermore, the integration
of model data provides a basis for rigorous validation
testing [8,9]. While the ‘same method - different data’
approach enables fair comparisons, the pipeline equally
enables ‘same data - different methods’ benchmarking.
Finally, we discuss how the re-usable and adaptable
conceptual design helps to derive analysis pipelines for
similar research endeavours to amplify collaborative
research.References 1. De Bonis, G. et al. (2019) "Analysis
pipeline for extracting features of cortical slow
oscillations". Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 13:70. doi:
10.3389/fnsys.2019.00070 2. Celotto, M. et al. (2020)
“Analysis and Model of Cortical Slow Waves Acquired with
Optical Techniques”. Methods and Protocols 3.1:14. doi:
10.3390/mps3010014 3. Sanchez-Vives, M. V., Massimini, M.,
and Mattia, M. (2017) “Shaping the default activity
pattern of the cortical network”. Neuron, 94(5), 993-1001.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2017.05.015 4. Grewe, J., Wachtler T,
and Benda J. (2011) "A bottom-up approach to data annotation
in neurophysiology." Frontiers in Neuroinformatics 5:16.
doi: 10.3389/fninf.2011.00016 5. Dasilva et al. (2020)
“Altered Neocortical Dynamics in a Mouse Model of
Williams–Beuren Syndrome”. Molecular Neurobiology, vol.
57, no 2, p. 765-777. doi: 10.1007/s12035-019-01732-4 6.
Sanchez-Vives, M. (2019) “Cortical activity features in
transgenic mouse models of cognitive deficits (Williams
Beuren Syndrome)” [Data set]. EBRAINS. doi:
10.25493/DZWT-1T8 7. Resta, F., Allegra Mascaro, A. L., and
Pavone, F. (2020). Study of Slow Waves (SWs) propagation
through wide-field calcium imaging of the right cortical
hemisphere of GCaMP6f mice [Data set]. EBRAINS. doi:
10.25493/3E6Y-E8G 8. Gutzen, R. et al. (2018) "Reproducible
neural network simulations: statistical methods for model
validation on the level of network activity data." Frontiers
in Neuroinformatics 12:90. doi: 10.3389/fninf.2018.00090 9.
Trensch, G. et al. (2018) "Rigorous neural network
simulations: a model substantiation methodology for
increasing the correctness of simulation results in the
absence of experimental validation data." Frontiers in
Neuroinformatics 12:81. doi: 10.3389/fninf.2018.00090},
month = {Sep},
date = {2020-09-29},
organization = {Bernstein Conference, online
(Germnay), 29 Sep 2020 - 29 Oct 2020},
subtyp = {After Call},
cin = {INM-6 / INM-10 / IAS-6},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-6-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)INM-10-20170113 /
I:(DE-Juel1)IAS-6-20130828},
pnm = {571 - Connectivity and Activity (POF3-571) / 574 - Theory,
modelling and simulation (POF3-574) / HBP SGA2 - Human Brain
Project Specific Grant Agreement 2 (785907) / HBP SGA3 -
Human Brain Project Specific Grant Agreement 3 (945539)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-571 / G:(DE-HGF)POF3-574 /
G:(EU-Grant)785907 / G:(EU-Grant)945539},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)24},
doi = {10.12751/NNCN.BC2020.0030},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/885608},
}