Page 1 of 1

Gap junction versus connect

Posted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:14 pm
by Ken
Hi!

I was just curious about this implementation I found on ModelDB: Fronto-parietal visuospatial WM model with HH cells (Edin et al 2007)

They use gap junctions to connect the soma and dendrites instead of the standard implemetation "connect" (nseg = 1 in their case).

Is more efficient, totally equivalent, or something else entirely? Just to be sure I'm not missing something...

Re: Gap junction versus connect

Posted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:40 pm
by ted
If motivation isn't spelled out in the source code or in the paper itself, the surest way to find out what's in the mind of the implementer is . . . to ask the implementer. This one is a nice guy, and would probably tell you. My guess is that they were using NEURON to replicate a previous non-NEURON implementation, and wanted explicit control over the resistances between adjacent nodes. Fine for their purposes, but from a purely computational standpoint it is not preferable to using NEURON's "connect" in terms of stability, accuracy, or speed, and not something that I would recommend for anyone who is developing new code.