Toward Standardization of Electrophysiology and Computational Tissue Strain in Rodent Intracortical Microelectrode Models.

Shreya Mahajan,John K. Hermann,Hillary W. Bedell,Jonah A. Sharkins,Lei Chen,Keying Chen,Seth M. Meade,Cara S. Smith,Jacob Rayyan,He Feng,Youjoung Kim,Matthew A. Schiefer,Dawn M. Taylor,Jeffrey R. Capadona,Evon S. Ereifej
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00416
IF: 5.7
2020-01-01
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Abstract:Progress has been made in the field of neural interfacing using both mouse and rat models, yet standardization of these models' interchangeability has yet to be established. The mouse model allows for transgenic, optogenetic, and advanced imaging modalities which can be used to examine the biological impact and failure mechanisms associated with the neural implant itself. The ability to directly compare electrophysiological data between mouse and rat models is crucial for the development and assessment of neural interfaces. The most obvious difference in the two rodent models is size, which raises concern for the role of device-induced tissue strain. Strain exerted on brain tissue by implanted microelectrode arrays is hypothesized to affect long-term recording performance. Therefore, understanding any potential differences in tissue strain caused by differences in the implant to tissue size ratio is crucial for validating the interchangeability of rat and mouse models. Hence, this study is aimed at investigating the electrophysiological variances and predictive device-induced tissue strain. Rat and mouse electrophysiological recordings were collected from implanted animals for eight weeks. A finite element model was utilized to assess the tissue strain from implanted intracortical microelectrodes, taking into account the differences in the depth within the cortex, implantation depth, and electrode geometry between the two models. The rat model demonstrated a larger percentage of channels recording single unit activity and number of units recorded per channel at acute but not chronic time points, relative to the mouse model Additionally, the finite element models also revealed no predictive differences in tissue strain between the two rodent models. Collectively our results show that these two models are comparable after taking into consideration some recommendations to maintain uniform conditions for future studies where direct comparisons of electrophysiological and tissue strain data between the two animal models will be required.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?