Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 90 references

Cellular Mechanisms of Phase Maintenance in a Pyloric Motif of a Central Pattern Generator

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read By shifting the half-activation voltages of two ionic currents, a three-neuron pyloric CPG motif keeps a triphasic pattern across a 60-fold range of periods.

desk verdict Solid model extension of the Cornerstone bifurcation, but the biological claim needs a serious noise analysis before it can be taken as a neuromodulatory mechanism. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09360 v1 pith:WQIZEYSI submitted 2025-07-12 q-bio.NC nlin.PS

Gabrielle O'Brien , Adam L. Weaver , William H. Barnett , Dmitry A. Kozhanov , Gennady S. Cymbalyuk This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.NCnlin.PS MSC 37N2592C2034C23
keywords phasemaintenancecentralpatterngeneratorpyloricnetworkCornerstonebifurcationblue-skycatastropheinverse-square-rootlawneuromodulationhalf-activationvoltage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Rhythmic behaviors such as digestion and locomotion must keep their internal timing while the overall speed changes, and this paper offers a biophysical explanation for how a small neural circuit can do this. Working with a three-neuron model of the crustacean pyloric pattern generator, it shows that shifting just two parameters — the half-activation voltages of a potassium current and a hyperpolarization-activated current — lengthens burst duration, interburst interval, or latency to fire in a controlled way. Because those lengths decide where each neuron's activity falls in the cycle, coordinating the two shifts keeps a triphasic pattern at near-constant phase while the period stretches from 0.5 to 30 seconds. The control is organized around the Cornerstone bifurcation, where the transitions between bursting, silence, and spiking meet; near that point, each controlled duration grows as the inverse square root of the parameter distance. If real neurons can regulate these voltages precisely enough, the same scheme would explain phase maintenance in networks whose follower neurons are naturally bursting, silent, or spiking.

What carries the argument

The Cornerstone bifurcation is the organizing center: the codimension-2 point in the $(\theta_{K2},\theta_h)$ plane where the blue-sky catastrophe (the bursting-to-spiking transition) meets the saddle-node-on-invariant-circle bifurcation (the bursting-to-silence transition). Its ghost — the lingering slow passage near the bifurcation point — makes the interval controlled by each parameter scale as $1/\sqrt{|\alpha-\alpha^*|}$, where $\alpha^*$ is the critical parameter value. Because the two parameters act on complementary phases of the burst cycle, one on the active phase and one on the silent phase, moving them together along an arc toward the Cornerstone point lengthens the cycle period while preserving the ratio of burst duration to interburst interval.

What would settle it

A dynamic-clamp or pharmacological experiment on an identified pyloric neuron that steps the half-activation voltage of $I_{K2}$ or $I_h$ toward its presumed critical value and measures burst duration, interburst interval, or post-inhibitory latency would settle it: the paper's claim predicts these quantities grow as $1/\sqrt{|\alpha-\alpha^*|}$ without bound as $\alpha$ approaches $\alpha^*$, whereas a system with noisy or saturating channel regulation would show a floor or a finite maximum below that divergence.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the voltages of half-activation of two currents, $\theta_{K2}$ for the non-inactivating potassium current and $\theta_h$ for the hyperpolarization-activated current, form a two-parameter control space for the temporal structure of a pyloric CPG motif. Near the Cornerstone bifurcation — the codimension-2 point where a blue-sky catastrophe and a saddle-node on an invariant circle intersect — each endogenous activity regime provides one mechanism: in a bursting neuron, $\theta_{K2}$ approaching its critical value lengthens the burst while $\theta_h$ approaching its critical value lengthens the interburst interval; in a silent neuron, $\theta_{K2}$ near the saddle-node for periodic orbits sets the duration of a single inhibition-triggered burst; and in a spiking neuron, $\theta_h$ near the saddle-node for equilibria sets the duration of a pause after inhibition. In all three cases the controlled duration follows an inverse-square-root law, and the paper tunes these parameters along arcs toward the Cornerstone point to generate 20 cycle periods from 0.5 to 30 s while holding every neuron near one-third duty cycle. The result is shown in four ensembles — both followers bursting, both silent, both spiking, and one silent with one spiking — and in three of the four ensembles only three varying parameters (the driver's two plus one follower's one) are needed to recover the full range of triphasic patterns.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that biological neuromodulation can set and hold the half-activation voltages of the potassium and h-currents with the extreme precision used in the simulations, where some follower parameters sit less than a nanovolt from the Cornerstone values; if real channel kinetics are noisy or coarsely regulated, the inverse-square-root ghost that makes durations grow will not operate as described.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the Cornerstone mechanism is correct, phase maintenance requires no global coordinating signal: each neuron can independently set its own $\theta_{K2}$ and $\theta_h$ to fix its duty cycle at any period.
  • The inverse-square-root scaling is a fingerprint: recordings showing burst duration, interburst interval, or post-inhibitory latency growing as $1/\sqrt{|\alpha-\alpha^*|}$ as a modulatory parameter is shifted would confirm the mechanism.
  • Across all ensembles the number of spikes per burst grows linearly with period at roughly 49 spikes per second, so longer bursts arise by adding stereotyped spikes, a signature that experimentalists can look for in phase-maintaining pyloric neurons.
  • The minimal-parameter result — three varying parameters in three of the four ensembles — implies the neuromodulatory load of phase maintenance can be small, needing only one follower parameter in addition to the pacemaker's two.
  • Because duty cycle is set by the ratio of the two parameter distances, the same mechanisms should support phase divisions other than one-third, generalizing the framework to rhythms with different phase structure.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A biological reading the paper does not itself make: because dynamic-clamp experiments can shift $\theta_h$ and $\theta_{K2}$, the mechanism predicts that slowly ramping these parameters toward the Cornerstone values should produce diverging interburst intervals or latencies in real pyloric neurons, which would be a direct experimental test.
  • The extremely fine parameter tolerances (down to nanovolts) suggest that if this scheme operates in living neurons, it must be implemented by activity-dependent homeostatic regulation of channel kinetics rather than by fixed expression levels, something the model does not address.
  • The three-parameter success in Ensembles 1, 3, and 4 hints that larger circuits — or coupled CPGs such as the pyloric–gastric system — might maintain phase with a similarly low-dimensional control strategy, but the paper does not simulate such networks.
  • The inverse-square-root curve fits used parameter sets that were selected by hand to reach one-third duty cycles, so an open statistical question is how much parameter slack the pattern tolerates under natural variability; this determines whether the mechanism is plausible in real preparations.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a three-neuron conductance-based model of a pyloric CPG motif, with an endogenously bursting driver (AB) and two follower neurons (LP, PY) whose isolated dynamics are bursting, silent, or spiking. The authors use their previously described Cornerstone codimension-2 bifurcation, controlled by the half-activation voltages θK2 and θh, to propose three cellular mechanisms: Mechanism 1 controls burst duration and interburst interval in bursting neurons, Mechanism 2 controls the duration of a pulse-triggered burst in silent neurons, and Mechanism 3 controls the duration of a pause in spiking neurons. They construct four ensembles with different follower activity regimes, select twenty parameter sets per ensemble to produce triphasic patterns with approximately one-third duty cycle at periods from 0.5 to 30 s, and report near-constant duty cycles and follower phases. Section 3.5 shows that, for Ensembles 1, 3, and 4, varying only one follower parameter in addition to the two AB parameters suffices to maintain triphasic rhythm, while Ensemble 2 could not be tuned this way. The paper also fits the observed durations to inverse-square-root laws and analyzes steady-state IK2 and Ih currents as a function of period.

Significance. If valid, the paper offers a biophysically interpretable family of mechanisms by which follower neurons with different intrinsic activity regimes could participate in phase-maintaining CPG patterns, and it makes falsifiable predictions: burst duration grows by adding stereotyped spikes, latency to firing in spiking neurons is controlled by Ih half-activation, and the relevant durations follow inverse-square-root scaling near bifurcation. Strengths include the explicit model equations and parameter tables, deterministic numerical integration with stated tolerances, quantified phase and duty-cycle ranges for all ensembles, and a clearly articulated relationship to the authors' earlier Cornerstone bifurcation framework. The main weakness is that the biological relevance of the mechanism is asserted without evidence that neurons can control the half-activation voltages with the precision used in the simulations; the paper also provides no sensitivity or noise analysis and reports no uncertainty for the curve fits.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.3, §3.5, Figs. 2 and 8] The long-period regime of the proposed mechanisms requires parameter values extraordinarily close to the bifurcation: for example, the PY neuron in Ensemble 3 at 30 s uses θh = 0.04135804605 V while the fitted critical value is θh* = 0.041358046586 V (Fig. 6), a difference of about 5×10^-10 V, and other 20 s parameter sets differ by roughly 10^-7 to 10^-10 V. Since the abstract claims that neuromodulation 'could adjust' neuronal properties to preserve phase, this precision requirement is load-bearing. Typical neuromodulatory shifts of voltage-of-half-activation are millivolt-scale, four to seven orders of magnitude larger. No sensitivity analysis, noise analysis, or evidence of such fine parameter control is provided. I recommend adding an explicit robustness analysis: perturb each selected parameter set by realistic amounts (e.g., 0.1–1 mV and channel-noise-like fluctuations) and report the resulting phase variability, or clearly restrict the biological claim to the shorter-period range where precision requirements are less extreme.
  2. [§2.2 and §3.1–3.4] The near-constant duty cycle is partly constructed rather than emergent. The methods state that parameter sets were selected so that AB and each follower neuron would have approximately one-third duty cycle at each cycle period, and the twenty parameter sets were hand-selected to satisfy this criterion. Therefore the near-constant duty cycles in Figs. 3C, 4C, 5C, 6C, and 7D largely confirm the selection procedure rather than test the mechanism. The independent content is the maintenance of burst order and the near-constant phases near one-third and two-thirds; these are also targets of the selection, although the achievement of stable ordered triphasic patterns across all twenty periods is nontrivial. To strengthen the claim, the paper should demonstrate that the mechanism maintains phase for target duty cycles other than one-third, or show that small perturbations away from the selected parameter sets preserve the pattern; otherwise the phrase 'phase maintenance' should be qualified as 'phase maintenance under the specific construction used here.'
  3. [§3.2–3.4, Figs. 5–7] The inverse-square-root law is a central quantitative claim, but the curve fits are reported without any measure of uncertainty or goodness of fit. The coefficients a, b, and θ* are given to many significant digits, yet no confidence intervals, residual plots, or χ² values are shown. Moreover, the fits are applied only to the twenty hand-selected successful parameter sets; the paper states in §3.5 that failed searches are 'data not shown,' and the four-parameter variation claim is also 'data not shown.' Because the selection of successful cases can bias the apparent scaling, the manuscript should provide the fitted exponent as a free parameter (rather than assuming the inverse-square-root form), together with residual diagnostics and at least a summary of the failed searches. Without this, the quantitative evidence for the inverse-square-root law is incomplete.
  4. [§2.1, Figs. 2, 5, 6, 7, 8] The sign convention for θh is inconsistent across the manuscript and must be unified. The model definition says θh is the negative value of the voltage of half-activation (V½h = -θh), and the Cornerstone value is stated as θh* = 0.041356548 V in §2.1. However, Figs. 5–7 use θh* = -0.041358046586 V and fix θh at -0.0415 V, while Figs. 2 and 8 list positive θh values such as 0.04135646145 V. Additionally, Fig. 6's caption says 'where θh is fixed at -0.0106999 V,' which appears to be a typo for θK2. These inconsistencies make reproduction difficult and obscure whether the long-period parameter sets are near the Cornerstone bifurcation in the same direction as claimed. The authors should adopt one convention, state it explicitly next to every table and figure, and correct the figure-caption typos.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains the typo 'We idescribe' and should read 'We describe.'
  2. [§3.3] The text refers to 'Fig. 4C' when describing driver and follower duty cycles for Ensemble 3; this should be Fig. 6C and Fig. 6D, respectively.
  3. [§3.5 and supplementary tables] The manuscript repeatedly cites 'supplementary Table 1' and 'supplementary Table 2' but these tables are not included in the submitted text. They should be provided, since the twenty parameter sets per ensemble are central to reproducibility.
  4. [§2.1, Table 2] The table lists different reversal potentials for AB→LP in Ensemble 3 versus Ensemble 4, but the text does not explain why this difference is needed; a sentence motivating these choices would help.
  5. [Data Availability] The statement says the MATLAB code 'will be available' upon acceptance; for a computational paper, depositing the code in ModelDB before review would allow the referees to verify the simulations and curve fits.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Phase-maintenance 'result' is built into the parameter-selection protocol: neurons are tuned to one-third duty cycle at every period and follower delays are set to the driver burst duration, so near-constant phase is an input, not an emergent prediction.

  1. self definitional [Section 2.2 (Methods, 'Mechanisms for Precise Temporal Control...'); confirmed in Section 3.1 and Fig. 3]
    "Our method for generating triphasic patterns is as follows: first, we used Mechanism 1 to give AB approximately one-third duty cycle at each cycle period. Second, we coordinated LP and PY using Mechanism 1, 2 or 3 to give both followers approximately one-third duty cycle. Third, we selected synaptic weighting that produced the correct follower neuron burst order."

    The output the paper reports as support for phase maintenance—near-constant one-third/two-thirds phases across periods—is exactly the quantity fixed by the selection protocol. A duty cycle is burst duration divided by period, and follower phase is measured relative to the driver burst; requiring every neuron to have approximately one-third duty cycle at every period, and then reporting that duty cycles remain near one-third (Figs 3-7), is the selection criterion re-stated as a finding. Section 3.1's 'By design, driver neuron burst duration scaled linearly with period' makes the construction explicit. The network simulations show that the imposed timing survives the chosen inhibition scheme, not that phase maintenance is a derived consequence of the Cornerstone mechanisms.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.3 (Ensemble 3) and Fig. 6D]
    "We then selected θh for PY such that the delay was ~ 0.167 seconds, corresponding to AB’s burst duration."

    The 'latency to spiking' that Mechanism 3 is claimed to control is set directly to the target value (AB's burst duration, i.e., one-third of the period). The later report that 'the phases are roughly one-third and two-thirds' (Section 3.3) is therefore the fitted value, not an emergent prediction. The same construction is used in Ensemble 4, where PY parameters from Ensemble 3 are reused because they 'fixed the delay to firing in response to AB to approximately 167 ms.'

full rationale

The model is fully specified and the Cornerstone bifurcation framework is imported from the authors' prior work (Barnett & Cymbalyuk 2014). That self-citation is not by itself circular: the equations are given in Section 2.1 and the bifurcation structure can be recomputed from them, and the current paper performs new network simulations. The circularity lies in the phase-maintenance claim. Section 2.2 defines the method as selecting parameters so that AB has one-third duty cycle at each period and followers are coordinated to one-third duty cycle; Section 3.1 admits 'By design, driver neuron burst duration scaled linearly with period.' Since phase is burst duration divided by period, and follower phase is measured relative to the driver burst, fixing each neuron's duty cycle to one-third at every period and setting follower delays equal to the driver burst duration mathematically forces the reported near-one-third/two-third phases. The network simulations therefore demonstrate persistence of an imposed pattern under chosen synaptic weights, not emergence of phase maintenance from the mechanisms. The inverse-square-root curves in Figs 5-6 are curve fits with fitted critical values, so they describe the data rather than independently predict it. Section 3.5's 'data not shown' negative results are unverifiable but affect robustness, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the model equations, the prior bifurcation parameter values, the inverse-square-root scaling law, and hand-selected parameter sets; several fitted coefficients and ad hoc synaptic changes are needed to produce the reported patterns.

free parameters (8)
  • a and b coefficients for Fig 5 burst duration fit = a = 0.03237 s, b = 0.2705199 s
    Fitted to simulated burst durations of silent follower neurons versus distance to θK2* in Fig 5A.
  • a and b coefficients for Fig 5 interburst interval fit = a = 0.06474007 s, b = 0.54103987 s
    Fitted to simulated interburst intervals in Fig 5A.
  • a and b coefficients for Fig 6 PY interburst interval fit = a = 4.608614e-4 s, b = 0 s
    Fitted to PY pause durations in Fig 6A.
  • a and b coefficients for Fig 6 PY burst duration fit = a = 2.304307e-4 s, b = 0 s
    Fitted to PY burst durations in Fig 6A.
  • Time scaling factor chi = 30
    Hand-chosen to rescale leech-inspired spike width (~209 ms) to pyloric timescale (~7 ms); enters every equation in the model.
  • AB-to-PY and LP-to-PY synaptic reversal potentials in Ensemble 3 = -0.04214 V
    Adjusted from -0.048 V to restore inverse-square-root scaling of Mechanism 3; the paper says the original value prevented the mechanism from functioning.
  • LP-to-PY synaptic conductance in Ensembles 3 and 4 = 0 nS (up to 2e-8 nS)
    Set to zero or negligible because LP inhibition blocked the PY pause mechanism; justified by citing Weaver and Hooper (2003).
  • 20 hand-selected (θh, θK2) parameter sets = Not listed in reviewed text (supplementary Table 1)
    Selected manually along a concave arc near the Cornerstone bifurcation to give each neuron approximately one-third duty cycle at cycle periods from 0.5 to 30 s; these choices directly support the displayed phase constancy.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The three-current Hodgkin-Huxley model with instantaneous INa, non-inactivating IK2, Ih, and leak, developed originally for leech heart interneurons [48], remains valid when time-scaled by chi=30 and connected in a pyloric motif.
    Section 2.1 states the model was inspired by leech heart interneuron experiments and is scaled to pyloric spike widths; no new experimental validation of the model is provided.
  • domain assumption The codimension-2 Cornerstone bifurcation structure and the parameter values θK2* = -0.010505 V and θh* = 0.041356548 V from Barnett and Cymbalyuk (2014) are accurate for the present network simulations.
    Used throughout Section 3 as the organizing center; the grid sampling from the prior paper is not reproduced here.
  • standard math Durations of burst, interburst, and latency diverge as one over the square root of the distance to the bifurcation near saddle-node, SNIC, and blue-sky bifurcations.
    The inverse-square-root law is a standard result of saddle-node bifurcation theory; the paper fits rather than derives it for the network.
  • ad hoc to paper For Fig 10 current calculations, voltage averages from the longest-cycle pattern are held fixed across all cycle periods, so changes in IK2 and Ih reflect only θ changes.
    Section "Coregulation of IK2 and Ih" states this explicitly to remove noise; it assumes voltage waveform shape does not affect the comparison.
  • domain assumption Removing or weakening the LP-to-PY synapse preserves biological fidelity in Ensembles 3 and 4.
    The paper cites Weaver and Hooper for the biological synapse having no significant effect, and sets conductance to zero or ~2e-8 nS; this makes the triphasic rhythm possible.
  • domain assumption Neuromodulators can independently and precisely shift θK2 and θh in a coordinated manner.
    Discussion section 4.2 lists dopamine, serotonin, and myomodulin as modulators of similar currents, but no direct demonstration is cited that these specific half-activation voltages are co-regulated with the precision required by the model.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cellular Mechanisms of Phase Maintenance in a Pyloric Motif of a Central Pattern Generator." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WQIZEYSI

@misc{pith2026250709360,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cellular Mechanisms of Phase Maintenance in a Pyloric Motif of a Central Pattern Generator},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WQIZEYSI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09360}
}
read the original abstract

In many neural networks, patterns controlling rhythmic behaviors are maintained across a wide range of periods. In the crustacean pyloric central pattern generator (CPG), a constant bursting pattern is preserved over a three-to-fivefold range of periods. We idescribe how neuromodulation could adjust neuronal properties to preserve phase relations as the period changes. We developed a biophysical model implementing a reduced pyloric network motif, which has a bursting neuron and two follower neurons interconnected through inhibitory synaptic coupling. We described cellular mechanisms supporting phase maintenance and investigated possible coordination between these mechanisms in four dynamically distinct ensembles of a pyloric CPG producing a triphasic pattern. The coordinated variation of the voltages of half-activation for potassium (VK2) and hyperpolarization-activated (Vh) currents provides a family of three mechanisms for control of burst duration, interburst interval, and latency to spiking. The mechanisms are determined by the Cornerstone bifurcation, one of the Shilnikov blue sky catastrophe scenarios. In Mechanism 1, in a bursting neuron, the burst duration increases as VK2 nears a blue-sky catastrophe bifurcation, while the interburst interval grows as Vh approaches a saddle-node on an invariant circle bifurcation. In Mechanism 2, a silent neuron responds with a single burst to short input; the burst duration grows as VK2 approaches a saddle-node bifurcation for periodic orbits. In Mechanism 3, a spiking neuron responds with a pause to short input; the pause duration grows as Vh nears a saddle-node bifurcation for stationary states. In all three mechanisms, the measured quantities grow without bound as the bifurcation parameter nears its critical value, consistent with an inverse-square-root law.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Friesen, W.O. and R.A. Pearce, Mechanisms of intersegmental coordination in leech locomotion. Seminars in Neuroscience, 1993. 5(1): p. 41-47

    1993

  2. [2]

    Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 1987

    Cohen, A.H., Effects of oscillator frequency on phase-locking in the lamprey central pattern generator. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 1987. 21(2-4): p. 113-125

    1987

  3. [3]

    Seminars in Neuroscience, 1993

    Grillner, S., et al., The neurophysiological bases of undulatory locomotion in vertebrates. Seminars in Neuroscience, 1993. 5(1): p. 17-27

    1993

  4. [4]

    Weller, and B

    Smarandache-Wellmann, C., C. Weller, and B. Mulloney, Mechanisms of coordination in distributed neural circuits: decoding and integration of coordinating information. J Neurosci,

  5. [5]

    Jamon, M. and F. Clarac, Locomotor patterns in freely moving crayfish (Procambarus clarkii). Journal of Experimental Biology, 1995. 198(Pt 3): p. 683

    1995

  6. [6]

    Jordan, and T

    DiCaprio, R.A., G. Jordan, and T. Hampton, Maintenance of motor pattern phase relationships in the ventilatory system of the crab. Journal of Experimental Biology, 1997. 200(6): p. 963-974

    1997

  7. [7]

    Eisen, J.S. and E. Marder, A mechanism for production of phase shifts in a pattern generator. Journal of Neurophysiology, 1984. 51(6): p. 1375-1393

    1984

  8. [8]

    Journal of Computational Neuroscience,

    Hooper, S.L., The pyloric pattern of the lobster (Panulirus interruptus) stomatogastric ganglion comprises two phase-maintaining subsets. Journal of Computational Neuroscience,

Show all 90 references
  1. [9]

    Marder, E. and D. Bucher, Central pattern generators and the control of rhythmic movements. Current Biology, 2001. 11(23): p. R986-R996

    2001

  2. [10]

    Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 2001

    Hill, A.A.V., et al., A model of a segmental oscillator in the leech heartbeat neuronal network. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 2001. 10(3): p. 281-302

    2001

  3. [11]

    Masino, and R.L

    Hill, A.A.V., M.A. Masino, and R.L. Calabrese, Model of intersegmental coordination in the leech heartbeat neuronal network. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2002. 87(3): p. 1586-1602

    2002

  4. [12]

    Peterson, E.L., Generation and coordination of heartbeat timing oscillation in the medicinal leech. I. Oscillation in isolated ganglia. Journal of Neurophysiology, 1983. 49(3): p. 611-626

    1983

  5. [13]

    J Exp Biol, 1979

    Calabrese, R.L., The roles of endogenous membrane properties and synaptic interaction in generating the heartbeat rhythm of the leech, Hirudo medicinalis. J Exp Biol, 1979. 82: p. 163-76. Cellular Mechanisms of Phase Maintenance 30

    1979

  6. [14]

    Wenning, A., et al., Output variability across animals and levels in a motor system. Elife,

  7. [15]

    Nagy, and M

    Bal, T., F. Nagy, and M. Moulins, The pyloric central pattern generator in Crustacea: a set of conditional neuronal oscillators. Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Sensory, Neural & Behavioral Physiology, 1988. 163(6): p. 715

    1988

  8. [16]

    Golowasch, and F

    Zhao, S., J. Golowasch, and F. Nadim, Pacemaker neuron and network oscillations depend on a neuromodulator-regulated linear current. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 2010. 4: p. 21

    2010

  9. [17]

    Rubin, J.E. and J.C. Smith, Robustness of respiratory rhythm generation across dynamic regimes. PLoS Computational Biology, 2019. 15(7): p. 1-27

    2019

  10. [18]

    Haddad, S.A. and E. Marder, Circuit Robustness to Temperature Perturbation Is Altered by Neuromodulators. Neuron, 2018. 100(3): p. 609-623

    2018

  11. [19]

    Scientific Reports,

    Elices, I., et al., Robust dynamical invariants in sequential neural activity. Scientific Reports,

  12. [20]

    Latorre, and P

    Berbel, B., R. Latorre, and P. Varona, Emergence of sequential dynamical invariants in central pattern generators from auto-organized constraints in their sequence time intervals. Neurocomputing, 2024. 578

    2024

  13. [21]

    Elices, and P

    Garrido-Peña, A., I. Elices, and P. Varona, Characterization of interval variability in the sequential activity of a central pattern generator model. Neurocomputing, 2021. 461: p. 667- 678

    2021

  14. [22]

    Eneuro, 2019

    Günay, C., et al., Synaptic Strengths Dominate Phasing of Motor Circuit: Intrinsic Conductances of Neuron Types Need Not Vary across Animals. Eneuro, 2019. 6(4)

    2019

  15. [23]

    Journal of Theoretical Biology, 2008

    Ivanchenko, M.V., et al., Pacemaker and network mechanisms of rhythm generation: Cooperation and competition. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 2008. 253(3): p. 452-461

    2008

  16. [24]

    Nadim, and A

    Mouser, C., F. Nadim, and A. Bose, Maintaining phase of the crustacean tri-phasic pyloric rhythm. Journal of Mathematical Biology, 2008. 57(2): p. 161-181

    2008

  17. [25]

    Journal of Neurophysiology, 2003

    Manor, Y., et al., Contribution of Synaptic Depression to Phase Maintenance in a Model Rhythmic Network. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2003. 90(5): p. 3513-3528

    2003

  18. [26]

    Neurocomputing, 2003

    Nadim, F., et al., Short-term synaptic dynamics promote phase maintenance in multi-phasic rhythms. Neurocomputing, 2003. 52: p. 79-87

    2003

  19. [27]

    Journal of Neuroscience, 2009

    Hooper, S.L., et al., Slow conductances could underlie intrinsic phase-maintaining properties of isolated lobster (Panulirus interruptus) pyloric neurons. Journal of Neuroscience, 2009. 29(6): p. 1834-1845

    2009

  20. [28]

    and experimental [29, 59] methods. In the single neuron model of Soofi et al., the conductances of eight currents were varied in a pairwise fashion and correlated with the degree of spike phase maintenance in a single bursting neuron. Two pairs were positively correlated: sodi...

  21. [29]

    Archila, and A.A

    Soofi, W., S. Archila, and A.A. Prinz, Co-variation of ionic conductances supports phase maintenance in stomatogastric neurons. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 2012. 33(1): p. 77-95

    2012

  22. [30]

    Journal of Neurophysiology, 2005

    MacLean, J.N., et al., Activity-independent coregulation of IA and Ih in rhythmically active neurons. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2005. 94(5): p. 3601-3617

    2005

  23. [31]

    Zhang, Y., et al., Activity-independent homeostasis in rhythmically active neurons. Neuron,

  24. [32]

    Prinz, and E

    Bucher, D., A.A. Prinz, and E. Marder, Animal-to-animal variability in motor pattern production in adults and during growth. Journal of Neuroscience, 2005. 25(7): p. 1611-1619

    2005

  25. [33]

    Masino, M.A. and R.L. Calabrese, Phase relationships between segmentally organized oscillators in the leech heartbeat pattern generating network. Journal of Neurophysiology,

  26. [34]

    Norris, and R.L

    Roffman, R.C., B.J. Norris, and R.L. Calabrese, Animal-to-animal variability of connection strength in the leech heartbeat central pattern generator. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2012. 107(6): p. 1681-1693. Cellular Mechanisms of Phase Maintenance 31

    2012

  27. [35]

    Hooper, S.L., Cellular properties underlying phase and duty cycle regulation in the lobster pyloric network (Abstract), in Soc Neurosci Abstr. 1993. p. 996

    1993

  28. [36]

    Trends in Neurosciences, 1995

    Grillner, S., et al., Neural networks that co-ordinate locomotion and body orientation in lamprey. Trends in Neurosciences, 1995. 18(6): p. 270-279

    1995

  29. [37]

    Khorkova, O. and J. Golowasch, Neuromodulators, not activity, control coordinated expression of ionic currents. J Neurosci, 2007. 27(32): p. 8709-18

    2007

  30. [38]

    Lett, and David J

    Temporal, S., Kawasi M. Lett, and David J. Schulz, Activity-Dependent Feedback Regulates Correlated Ion Channel mRNA Levels in Single Identified Motor Neurons. Current Biology,

  31. [39]

    Neuron, 2014

    O'Leary, T., et al., Cell Types, Network Homeostasis, and Pathological Compensation from a Biologically Plausible Ion Channel Expression Model. Neuron, 2014. 82(4): p. 809-821

    2014

  32. [40]

    Current Opinion in Physiology, 2018

    O'Leary, T., Homeostasis, failure of homeostasis and degenerate ion channel regulation. Current Opinion in Physiology, 2018. 2: p. 129-138

    2018

  33. [41]

    Lamb, D.G. and R.L. Calabrese, Small is beautiful: Models of small neuronal networks. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 2012. 22(4): p. 670-675

    2012

  34. [42]

    Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 2010

    Selverston, A.I., Invertebrate central pattern generator circuits. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 2010. 365(1551): p. 2329

    2010

  35. [43]

    Journal of Neurophysiology, 2011

    Wenning, A., et al., Bringing up the rear: new premotor interneurons add regional complexity to a segmentally distributed motor pattern. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2011. 106(5): p. 2201-2215

    2011

  36. [44]

    Current Biology: CB,

    Marder, E., et al., Invertebrate central pattern generation moves along. Current Biology: CB,

  37. [45]

    Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 1997

    Hooper, S.L., Phase maintenance in the pyloric pattern of the lobster (Panulirus interruptus) stomatogastric ganglion. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 1997. 4(3): p. 191-205

    1997

  38. [46]

    Marder, E. and D. Bucher, Understanding circuit dynamics using the stomatogastric nervous system of lobsters and crabs. Annual Review of Physiology. Vol. 69. 2007. 291-316

    2007

  39. [47]

    Marder, E. and R.L. Calabrese, Principles of rhythmic motor pattern generation. Physiological Reviews, 1996. 76(3): p. 687-717

    1996

  40. [48]

    Barnett, W.H. and G.S. Cymbalyuk, A codimension-2 bifurcation controlling endogenous bursting activity and pulse-triggered responses of a neuron model. PLoS One, 2014. 9(1): p. e85451

    2014

  41. [49]

    Shilnikov, A. and G. Cymbalyuk, Transition between tonic spiking and bursting in a neuron model via the blue-sky catastrophe. Physical Review Letters, 2005. 94(4): p. 048101

    2005

  42. [50]

    Science, 2002

    Milo, R., et al., Network motifs: Simple building blocks of complex networks. Science, 2002. 298(5594): p. 824-827

    2002

  43. [51]

    Shilnikov, L.P. and D.V. Turaev. A new simple bifurcation of a periodic orbit of ``blue sky catastrophe'' type. 2000. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI

    2000

  44. [52]

    Opdyke, C.A. and R.L. Calabrese, A persistent sodium current contributes to oscillatory activity in heart interneurons of the medicinal leech. Journal of Comparative Physiology A,

  45. [53]

    Shilnikov, A. and D. Turaev, Blue-sky catastrophe. Scholarpedia, 2007. 2: p. 1889

    2007

  46. [54]

    Weaver, A.L. and S.L. Hooper, Follower neurons in lobster (Panulirus interruptus) pyloric network regulate pacemaker period in complementary ways. Journal of Neurophysiology,

  47. [55]

    Weaver, A.L. and S.L. Hooper, Relating network synaptic connectivity and network activity in the lobster (Panulirus interruptus) pyloric network. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2003. 90(4): p. 2378-2386

    2003

  48. [56]

    Cymbalyuk, G.S. and R.L. Calabrese, A model of slow plateau-like oscillations based upon the fast Na+ current in a window mode. Neurocomputing, 2001. 38: p. 159-166

    2001

  49. [57]

    Neural Computation, 1999

    Golowasch, J., et al., Network Stability from Activity-Dependent Regulation of Neuronal Conductances. Neural Computation, 1999. 11(5): p. 1079-1096

    1999

  50. [58]

    Neuron, 2012

    Marder, E., Neuromodulation of Neuronal Circuits: Back to the Future. Neuron, 2012. 76(1): p. 1-11

    2012

  51. [59]

    Khorkova, O. and J. Golowasch, Neuromodulators, not activity, control coordinated expression of ionic currents. The Journal of Neuroscience, 2007. 27(32): p. 8709-8718

    2007

  52. [60]

    Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 2002

    Doiron, B., et al., Ghostbursting: A novel neuronal burst mechanism. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 2002. 12(1): p. 5-25

    2002

  53. [61]

    European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2008

    Reyes, M.B., et al., Artificial synaptic modification reveals a dynamical invariant in the pyloric CPG. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2008. 102(6): p. 667

    2008

  54. [62]

    Journal of Neuroscience, 1995

    Harris-Warrick, R.M., et al., Dopamine modulation of transient potassium current evokes phase shifts in a central pattern generator network. Journal of Neuroscience, 1995. 15(1 I): p. 342-358

    1995

  55. [63]

    Journal of Neuroscience,

    Rodgers, E.W., et al., Tonic nanomolar dopamine enables an activity-dependent phase recovery mechanism that persistently alters the maximal conductance of the hyperpolarization-activated current in a rhythmically active neuron. Journal of Neuroscience,

  56. [64]

    BioScience, 2014

    Golowasch, J., Ionic Current Variability and Functional Stability in the Nervous System. BioScience, 2014. 64(7): p. 570-580

    2014

  57. [65]

    Journal of Neurophysiology, 2008

    Spitzer, N., et al., Serotonin transduction cascades mediate variable changes in pyloric network cycle frequency in response to the same modulatory challenge. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2008. 99(6): p. 2844-2863

    2008

  58. [66]

    Tobin, A.-E. and R.L. Calabrese, Myomodulin increases Ih and inhibits the NA/K pump to modulate bursting in leech heart interneurons. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2005. 94(6): p. 3938-3950

    2005

  59. [67]

    J Neurosci, 2021

    Ellingson, P.J., et al., Comodulation of h- and Na(+)/K(+) Pump Currents Expands the Range of Functional Bursting in a Central Pattern Generator by Navigating between Dysfunctional Regimes. J Neurosci, 2021. 41(30): p. 6468-6483

    2021

  60. [68]

    Journal of Neuroscience, 2010

    Ball, J.M., et al., Coregulation of ion channel conductances preserves output in a computational model of a crustacean cardiac motor neuron. Journal of Neuroscience, 2010. 30(25): p. 8637-8649

    2010

  61. [69]

    Journal of Neurophysiology, 2010

    Zhang, H., et al., Cell specific dopamine modulation of the transient potassium current in the pyloric network by the canonical D1 receptor signal transduction cascade. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2010. 104(2): p. 873-884

    2010

  62. [70]

    Gutkin, B.S. and G.B. Ermentrout, Dynamics of Membrane Excitability Determine Interspike Interval Variability: A Link between Spike Generation Mechanisms and Cortical Spike Train Statistics. Neural Computation, 1998. 10(5): p. 1047-1065

    1998

  63. [71]

    Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 2003

    Laing, C.R., et al., Type I burst excitability. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 2003. 14(3): p. 329-342

    2003

  64. [72]

    The Journal of Neuroscience, 1997

    Baro, D.J., et al., Quantitative Single-Cell-Reverse Transcription-PCR Demonstrates That A- Current Magnitude Varies as a Linear Function of<em>shal</em> Gene Expression in Identified Stomatogastric Neurons. The Journal of Neuroscience, 1997. 17(17): p. 6597-6610. Cellular Mec...

    1997

  65. [73]

    Tierney, A.J. and R.M. Harris-Warrick, Physiological role of the transient potassium current in the pyloric circuit of the lobster stomatogastric ganglion. Journal of Neurophysiology,

  66. [74]

    Carr, and T

    Booth, V., T.W. Carr, and T. Erneux, Near-threshold bursting is delayed by a slow passage near a limit point. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 1997. 57(5): p. 1406-1420

    1997

  67. [75]

    Abbott, and E

    Golowasch, J., L.F. Abbott, and E. Marder, Activity-dependent regulation of potassium currents in an identified neuron of the stomatogastric ganglion of the crab Cancer borealis. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 1999. 19(20): p. RC33

    1999

  68. [76]

    Cangiano, L. and S. Grillner, Mechanisms of rhythm generation in a spinal locomotor network deprived of crossed connections: The lamprey hemicord. Journal of Neuroscience,

  69. [77]

    Friesen, W.O. and G.S. Stent, Generation of a locomotory rhythm by a neural network with reccurrent cyclic inhibition. Biological Cybernetics, 1977. 28(1): p. 27-40

    1977

  70. [78]

    Szücs, A., et al., Robust Microcircuit Synchronization by Inhibitory Connections. Neuron,

  71. [79]

    Journal of neurophysiology, 1999

    Elson, R.C., et al., Dynamic control of irregular bursting in an identified neuron of an oscillatory circuit. Journal of neurophysiology, 1999. 82(1): p. 115-122

    1999

  72. [80]

    Journal of Neuroscience, 2003

    Jones, S.R., et al., Coordination of cellular pattern-generating circuits that control limb movements: The sources of stable differences in intersegmental phases. Journal of Neuroscience, 2003. 23(8): p. 3457-3468

    2003

  73. [81]

    Katz, P.S. and R.M. Harris-Warrick, Recruitment of crab gastric mill neurons into the pyloric motor pattern by mechanosensory afferent stimulation. Journal of Neurophysiology, 1991. 65(6): p. 1442-1451

    1991

  74. [82]

    Weimann, J.M. and E. Marder, Switching neurons are integral members of multiple oscillatory networks. Current biology : CB, 1994. 4(10): p. 896-902

    1994

  75. [83]

    Thuma, J.B. and S.L. Hooper, Quantification of Gastric Mill Network Effects on a Movement Related Parameter of Pyloric Network Output in the Lobster. Journal of Neurophysiology,

  76. [84]

    Nature Reviews Neuroscience,

    Yuste, R., et al., The cortex as a central pattern generator. Nature Reviews Neuroscience,

  77. [85]

    Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2004

    Markram, H., et al., Interneurons of the neocortical inhibitory system. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2004. 5(10): p. 793-807. 6 Conflict of Interest The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be co...

    2004

  78. [89]

    Taylor, and E

    Bucher, D., A.L. Taylor, and E. Marder, Central pattern generating neurons simultaneously express fast and slow rhythmic activities in the stomatogastric ganglion. Journal of neurophysiology, 2006. 95(6): p. 3617-3632

    2006

  79. [2003]

    1327-1338

    89(3): p. 1327-1338. Cellular Mechanisms of Phase Maintenance 32

  80. [2005]

    R685-R699

    15(17): p. R685-R699

  81. [2011]

    16387-16397

    31(45): p. 16387-16397

  82. [2014]

    1899-1904

    24(16): p. 1899-1904

    1904

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.