Download PDF
Pharmacopsychiatry 2010; 43: S42-S49
DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1249025
Original Paper

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

The Evolution of Synapse Models – from Numbers to Networks to Spaces

B. Dulam-Banawa1 , A. Marin-Sanguino2 , E. Mendoza3 , 4
  • 1Institute of Mathematics, University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
  • 2Department of Membrane Biochemistry, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Martinstried, Germany
  • 3Faculty of Physics and Center for NanoScience, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany
  • 4Department of Computer Science, University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
17 May 2010 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

We review the evolution of synapse models over the last sixty-five years in terms of the changing paradigms: initially, the synapse was modelled only as part of a neuronal system, both as a number (weight of an edge in a connectionist network) and as a channel in a conductance-based model. With the availability of more structural and kinetic data, it came to be seen as a full-fledged biochemical network, accompanied by a shift from the previous “top-down” approach to a more “bottom-up” network reconstruction. Most recently, the synapse is seen as a geometric 3-dimensional space with various processes driving the dynamics. A particular focus is placed on models of the dopamine synapse and their connections to schizophrenia. The advances of detailed modelling on the synaptic level have highlighted the challenges of integrating the various functional levels, which are tightly coupled with processes on different scales in time and space. On the other hand, this effort will contribute to bridging the currently perceived gap between computational neuroscience and (computational) systems biology.

References

  • 1 Abbott LF, Kepler TB. Model neurons: From Hodgkin-Huxley to Hopfield.. In: Garrido L, ed. Statistical Mechanics of Neural Networks. 1990: 5-18
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Abbott LF, Regehr WG. Synaptic computation 2004.  Nature. 2004;  431 (7010) 796-803
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Braver TS, Barch DM, Cohen JD. Cognition and control in schizophrenia: a computational model of dopamine and prefrontal function.  Biological Psychiatry. 1999;  46 (3) 312-328
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Broderick G, Ruaini M, Chan E. et al . A life-like virtual cell membrane using discrete automata.  In Silico Biol. 2005;  5 (2) 163-178
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Burrage K, Hancock JF, Leier A. et al . Modelling and simulation techniques for membrane biology.  Briefings in Bioinformatics. 2007;  8 (4) 234-244
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Canavier CC, Landry RS. An increase in AMPA and a decrease in SK conductance increase burst firing by different mechanisms in a model of a dopamine neuron in vivo.  J Neurophysiol. 2006;  96 (5) 2549-2563
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Chapeau-Blondeau F, Chambet N. Synapse models for neural networks: from ion channel kinetics to multiplicative coefficients.  Neural Computation. 1995;  7 (4) 713-734
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chou I, Voit EO. Recent developments in parameter estimation and structure identification of biochemical and genomic systems.  Math Biosci. 2009;  219 (2) 57-83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 De Schutter E. Why are computational neuroscience and systems biology so different?.  PLoS Comp Bio. 2008;  4 (5) e10000078
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Deco G, Rolls ET. Attention, short-term memory, and action selection: a unifying theory.  Prog Neurobiol. 2005;  76 (4) 236-256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Destexhe A, Mainen ZF, Sejnowski T. An efficient method for computing synaptic conductances based on a kinetic model of receptor binding.  Neural Computation. 1994;  6 (1) 14-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Destexhe A, Mainen ZF, Sejnowski TJ. Synthesis of models for excitable membranes, synaptic transmission and neuromodulation using a common kinetic formalism.  Journal of Computational Neuroscience. 1994;  1 (3) 195-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Emes RD, Pocklington AJ, Anderson CN. et al . Evolutionary expansion and anatomical specialization of synapse proteome complexity.  Nat Neurosci. 2008;  11 (7) 799-806
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fernandez E, Schiappa R, Girault JA. et al . DARPP-32 is a robust integrator of dopamine and glutamate signals.  PLoS Comput Biol. 2006;  2 (12) e176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 FitzHugh R. Impulses and physiological states in theoretical models of nerve membrane.  Biophysical Journal. 1961;  1 (6) 445
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Garris PA, Wightman RM. Different kinetics govern dopaminergic transmission in the amygdala, prefrontal cortex, and striatum: an in vivo voltammetric study.  J Neurosci. 1994;  14 (1) 442-450
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hatzikirou H, Breier G, Deutsch A. Cellular automaton models for tumor invasion.. Encyclopedia of complexity and complex systems: Springer; 2008
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Hebb DO. The organization of behavior: a neuropsychological theory.  Wiley. 1949; 
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hodgkin AL, Huxley A. A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve.  The Journal of physiology. 1952;  117 (4) 500-544
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Hoffman R, Dobscha S. Cortical pruning and the development of schizophrenia: a computer model.  Schizophr Bull. 1989;  15 (3) 477-490
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Hopfield J. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities.  PNAS. 1982;  79 (8) 2554-2558
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Hopfield J, Tank D. Computing with neural circuits: a model.  Science. 1986;  233 (4764) 625-633
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Izhikevich EM, Edelman GM. Large-scale model of mammalian thalamocortical systems simple model of spiking neurons.  PNAS. 2008;  105 (9) 3593-3598
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Izhikevich EM, Gally JA, Edelman GM. Spike-timing dynamics of neuronal groups.  Cereb Cortex. 2004;  14 (8) 933-944
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Jamshidi N, Palsson BO. Formulating genome-scale kinetic models in the post-genome era.  Mol Syst Biol. 2008;  4 171
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Justice JB, Nicolaysen LC, Michael AC. Modeling the dopaminergic nerve terminal.  J Neurosci Methods. 1988;  22 (3) 239-252
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kawagoe KT, Garris PA, Wiedemann DJ. et al . Regulation of transient dopamine concentration gradients in the microenvironment surrounding nerve terminals in the rat striatum.  Neuroscience. 1992;  51 (1) 55-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Keener J, Sneyd J. Mathematical Physiology. New York : Springer-Verlag; 1998
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Le Novere N. The long journey of a systems biology of neuronal function.  BMC Systems Biology. 2007;  I 28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Lindskog M. Modelling of DARPP-32 regulation to understand intracellular signaling in psychiatric disease.  Pharmacopsychiatry. 2008;  41 (S 01) S99-S104
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lindskog M, Kim M, Wikström M. et al . Transient calcium and dopamine increase PKA activity and DARPP-32 phosphorylation.  PLoS Comput Biol. 2006;  2 (9) e119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Loh M, Rolls ET, Deco G. A dynamical systems hypothesis of schizophrenia.  PLoS Comput Biol. 2007;  3 (11) e228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Marin-Sanguino A, Mendoza ER. Hybrid modeling in computational neuropsychiatry.  Pharmacopsychiatry. 2008;  41 (S1) S85-S89
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 McCulloch WS, Pitts W. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity.  Bull of Mathbiol. 1943;  5 (4) 115-133
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Montague PR, Hyman SE, Cohen JD. Computational roles for dopamine in behavioral control.  Nature. 2004;  431 (7010) 760-767
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Nagumo, Arimoto S, Yoshizawa S. An Active Pulse Transmission Line Simulating Nerve Axon.  Proceedings of the IRE. 1962;  50 (10) 2061-2070
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Nicolaysen LC, Justice JB. Effects of cocaine on release and uptake of dopamine in vivo: differentiation by mathematical modeling.  Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1988;  31 (2) 327-335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 O'Reilly RC. Biologically based computational models of high-level cognition.  Science. 2006;  314 (5796) 91-94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Petrov V, Nikolova E, Wolkenhauer O. Reduction of nonlinear dynamic systems with an application to signal transduction pathways.  Systems Biology. 2005;  1 (1) 2-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Pocklington AJ, Armstrong JD, Grant SG. Organization of brain complexity--synapse proteome form and function.  Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic. 2006;  5 (1) 66-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Pocklington AJ, Cumiskey M, Armstrong JD. et al . The proteomes of neurotransmitter receptor complexes form modular networks with distributed functionality underlying plasticity and behavior.  Mol Syst Biol. 2006;  2 0023
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Qi Z, Miller GW, Voit EO. Computational Systems Analysis of Dopamine Metabolism.  PLoS ONE. 2008;  3 (6) e2444
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Reid AG. A critical analysis of an attractor network model of schihzophrenia.  CNS '96: Proceedings of the annual conference on Computational neuroscience: trends in research. 1997;  3 463-470
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Rosenblatt F. The perceptron: A probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain.  Psychological Review. 1958;  65 (6) 386-408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Song S, Miller KD, Abbott L. Competitive hebbian learning through spike-timing-dependent synaptic plasticity.  Nature Neuroscience. 2000;  3 (9) 919-926
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Stiles JR, Bartol TM, Salpeter MM. et al .New insights from reconstruction and monte carlo simulations with MCELL.. In “Synapses”.. In: Cowan M, Südhof TC, Stevens CF, eds. The Johns Hopkins University Press; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 47 Takahashi K, Arjunan SNV, Tomita M. Space in systems biology of signaling pathways – towards intracellular molecular crowding in silico.  FEBS Letters. 2005;  579 (8) 1783-1788
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Vera J, Curto R, Cascante M. et al . Detection of potential enzyme targets by metabolic modelling and optimization: application to a simple enzymopathy.  Bioinformatics. 2007;  23 (17) 2281-2289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Voit EO, Qi Z, Miller GW. Steps of modeling complex biological systems.  Pharmacopsychiatry. 2008;  41 (S 01) S78-S84
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Wightman RM, Amatore C, Engstrom RC. et al . Real-time characterization of dopamine overflow and uptake in the rat striatum.  Neuroscience. 1988;  25 (2) 513-523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Young D, Stark J, Kirschner D. Systems biology of persistent infection: tuberculosis as a case study.  Nature Review Microbiology. 2008;  6 (7) 520-528
    PubMedGoogle Scholar

Correspondence

Dr. E. Mendoza

Faculty of Physics and Center for NanoScience

Ludwig-Maximilians-University

Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1

80539 Munich

Germany

Phone: +49/1735729934

Email: mendoza@lmu.de