Sensory adaptation why is it important

The following minimal mathematical model describes the reactions in the scheme of Figure 1A :. The external stimulus u favors the production of y , which is instead inhibited by the negative feedback from x. In turn, the synthesis of x is enhanced by y. The model 1 is the simplest elementary dynamical system having an input-output behavior resembling that of olfactory transduction.

A straightforward algebraic manipulation allows to rewrite the system 1 in terms of z. In this case the regulatory actions have the opposite sign: u decreases z while the feedback from x promotes the formation of z. This is the minimal model which will serve as reference for the input-output behavior of phototransduction. By construction, the models 1 and 2 exhibit the same dynamical behavior up to a flipping symmetry in the y and z variables. An exegesis of these models, explaining the role of each of the terms and including other technical details such as shifted baseline levels, is presented in the Supplementary Information.

In particular, possible alternative minimal models are formulated and their responses investigated in Supplementary Figure S2 and S3. While several models exist able to capture perfect step adaptation 14 , 15 , 20 , 12 , 23 , 24 , there is one general principle to which most proposals are equivalent, namely that perfect step adaptation in order to be robust to parametric variations must be obtained by means of a negative regulation and that this regulation achieving perfect step adaptation must be of integral feedback type, see Refs.

In our minimal models 1 and 2 , an integral feedback is obtained when the degradation rate constant for x vanishes i. This corresponds to the second differential equation of 1 being formally solvable as the time-varying integral.

Hence the second pulse response is attenuated with respect to the first. However, lack of degradation of x t implies that the behavior occurs regardless of the lag time between the two pulses, which contradicts the experimental results shown in Figure 2B and Figure 3B. Hence a perfect adaptation model is inadequate for our sensory transduction pathways, because i it fails to reproduce the non-exact return to the prestimulus level observed in the step responses of Figure 2A and Figure 3A and ii it completely misses the recovery in the multipulse adaptation observed in Figure 2B and Figure 3B.

In a model like 1 or 2 , both types of adaptation are determined by the ratio between the characteristic time constants of the two kinetics, which are captured with good approximation by the first order kinetic terms i. This behavior is similar to what happens in our experiments with the olfactory transduction system shown in Figure 2. This situation resembles our experiments with phototransduction shown in Figure 3. Upon termination of a step, a response deactivates, meaning in our model 1 that the observable variable y returns to its pre-stimulus level y o which for simplicity and without loss of generality we are assuming equal to 0.

The way it does so is informative of the dynamics of the system. In a system with exact integral feedback, if the activation profile overshoots the baseline and then approaches it again, then the deactivation time course must follow a pattern which is qualitatively similar but flipped with respect to the baseline, i.

The undershooting in the deactivation phase should however be observable experimentally, i. No experiment with the olfactory system shows undershooting of the basal current. Also in phototransduction experiments, for both pulse and step responses in dark, no overshooting above the noise level can be observed in the deactivation phase. For both sensors, this behavior is confirmed by many more experiments available in the literature 33 , 34 , 35 , 7 , 29 , 9. As discussed more thoroughly in the Supplementary Information , the lack of deactivation undershooting is another element that can be used to rule out the presence of exact integral feedback regulation in our systems.

This is coherent with the step deactivation recordings shown in Figs. Assume now that the input protocol consists of a double step as in Figure 4.

This is indeed what happens for the model 1 , see Figure 4A. Given the very strong adaptation in olfactory sensory neurons, the double step experiment has been performed only in photoreceptors: indeed the combination of near zero baseline and almost perfect adaptation implies that in olfactory sensory neurons the presence of an overshoot will be hardly detectable. In photoreceptors, instead, the double step deactivation behavior of 1 is faithfully reproduced. In the input protocol, the broader step of smaller amplitude corresponds to a constant dim light on top of which a more intense light step is applied.

The current recording shown in Figure 4B indeed exhibits a consistent deactivation overshooting not observed in dark. In this paper we will not attempt to present comprehensive mathematical models of the two sensory pathways containing all the biochemical reactions known to be involved in the signaling transduction of the stimuli, but will limit ourselves to consider the section of the pathways involving the Cyclic Nucleotide-Gated CNG channels and a primary calcium-induced feedback regulation.

For the olfactory system, the pathway is depicted in Supplementary Figure S4A and the corresponding model in S9. In our minimalistic approach, in the olfactory system the variable y can be associated to the fraction of open CNG channels on the ciliary membrane.

In absence of stimulation, the channels are almost completely closed. Upon arrival of a stimulation, the CNG channels open and the inflow of calcium ions triggers the negative feedback regulation which closes the CNG channels. In a model like 1 , the feedback variable x plays the role of the concentration of the calcium-activated protein complexes responsible for the gating of the channels. More details on the reactions considered and on those omitted , on the set of differential equations used for these reactions and on the fitting of the kinetic parameters are available on the Supplementary Information.

The fit resulting from this kinetic model is shown in blue in Figure 2 , see also Supplementary Figure S4. Its dynamical behavior is very similar to that of 1 , shown in Figure 1B. Unlike for the olfactory system, in phototransduction the CNG channels are partially open in absence of stimulation and they further close when the photoreceptors are hit by an input of light.

If we think of z as the fraction of open CNG channels, then the mechanism 2 can be used in phototransduction to describe qualitatively the core action of the primary feedback loop due to guanylate cyclase. In the response to light, in fact, its effect is to reactivate z. Also for this system a thorough description of the dynamical model and of its kinetic details is provided in the Supplementary Information. The resulting fit for the phototransduction experiments is the blue traces of Figures 3 and 4B.

Other details are in Supplementary Figure S5. Also in this case the core dynamical behavior of the pathway-specific model S11 and that of the elementary model 2 resemble considerably.

For phototransduction, more complex input protocols than those discussed here are possible and are sometimes discussed in the literature As an example, the response of both models S9 and S11 to a train of identical equispaced pulses is commented in the Supplementary Information and in Figure S6.

To date, the vast majority of papers dealing with models for sensory adaptation has focused on the perfect step adaptation case 11 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , While in some examples of sensory response, like in E. These sensorial responses are however much more complex cognitive processes than the single cell signaling transductions considered in this paper and have little to do with the models and data discussed in the paper.

For example, the visual system can adapt over light variations of several orders of magnitude. However, when looking at single photoreceptors, if cones virtually never saturate in response to steady illumination 2 , 37 , the capacity of rods the receptors studied in this paper to adapt is much more modest and this can already be seen in the partial step adaptation of Figure 3A.

This model not only can adapt perfectly, but it can do so without any feedback loop. If experiments such as those of Figure 2 show that at the level of single receptor step adaptation is not exact, other experiments in low-calcium show that when the calcium-induced feedback regulation is impaired, adaptation basically disappears and even a single pulse response terminates very slowly see e.

This implies that feedback regulation is crucial for adaptation in our olfactory neurons. As similar arguments hold also for phototransduction, in this paper incoherent feedforward mechanisms are never considered as potential models for adaptation perfect or less. Even though the distinction between perfect and partial step adaptation has been known for a while 11 , the dynamical implications of the different models for other input protocols has in our knowledge never been investigated in detail.

In this paper we show that not only this difference is observable in several experimental features of the responses, but also that it has important conceptual consequences. While this allows the system to climb exactly any step of input all steps have the same steady state y o , it implies that the transient responses during stimulus activation and termination should have similar but specular with respect to a baseline level profiles as in Model 3 of Supplementary Figure S2.

This implies that while weberian-type graded responses for the peaks of the transients are still possible 2 , properties involving the whole profile of the response such as the input scale invariance of Refs. Our double step experiment with its asymmetry in the two deactivation phases clearly shows that such an input invariance cannot hold not even qualitatively for our sensors. Furthermore, anchoring the state around a nominal input value helps shifting the dynamical range back to that value when the stimulus terminates, resetting the sensor to the most plausible value of the environment without incurring into unrealistic deactivation transients.

Another important difference between the dynamical models of perfect and partial adaptation concerns the effect on internal, nonobservable variables like our x in 1. Exact integral implies an infinite time constant for x or, in practice, longer that the time scales of interest for the observable kinetics.

Partial step adaptation, instead, is associated to changes in x which are still slower than those observed on the output of the system, but not by orders of magnitude. How much slower these changes are influences how much adaptation we observe in the step responses.

Experiments with time-varying input protocols, namely with double pulse sequences, allow to have a rough estimate of the slower time constant. In olfactory transduction, this time constant is normally associated to the shift in dose-response plots which is an alternative, compatible, way to describe the multipulse adaptation effect, see Supplementary Figure 6 of De Palo et al.

What is predicted by theoretical models and confirmed by experiments is that the speed of the recovery in multipulse adaptation is inversely correlated to the amount of step adaptation. In particular, for the two sensors investigated in this work the relative amount of the two forms of adaptation are different. From a physiological perspective, this difference can be interpreted in terms of the different dynamical ranges in which the two sensors are required to operate.

The visual system of vertebrates operates over a range of light intensities spanning 6—10 orders of magnitudes thanks to the presence of two kinds of photoreceptors, rods and cones and to their adaptation properties 7 , 8 , 2. The olfactory system is capable of detecting very low concentrations of odorants, but has a less broad dynamical range 38 , A faint olfactory stimulation is properly detected, but very often its perception rapidly fades away and is not perceived any more, while a visual stimulation with a faint contrast is perceived and its perception remains.

These basic properties of vision and olfaction are the result of a complex and sophisticated signal processing occurring in the visual and olfactory systems but are also in part determined by what occurs at the receptor level.

Vertebrate photoreceptors respond to light with a membrane hyperpolarization and this hyperpolarization is transformed in the retina into a train of spikes sent to higher visual centers In order to operate properly over an extended range of light intensities, photoreceptors must have only a partial adaptation. Sensory adaptation is a reduction in sensitivity to a stimulus after constant exposure to it. While sensory adaptation reduces our awareness of a constant stimulus, it helps free up our attention and resources to attend to other stimuli in the environment around us.

All five of our senses can experience sensory adaptation. Our senses are constantly adjusting to what's around us, as well as to us individually and what we are experiencing, such as aging or disease.

Just imagine what it would be like if you didn't experience sensory adaptation. You might find yourself overwhelmed by the pungent smell of onions coming from the kitchen or the blare of the television from the living room. Since constant exposure to a sensory stimulus reduces our sensitivity to it, we are able to shift our attention to other things in our environment rather than focusing on one overwhelming stimulus. Here are some more examples of sensory adaptation in different senses.

Even hand-eye coordination adjusts when necessary. For instance, if you put on goggles that make everything appear to be a little off and you try to throw a ball at an object, eventually your sensory adaptation will take over and you'll adjust enough to be able to hit it. If you've heard the term "nose blind," you've heard of sensory adaption; it's the same thing. But it's different from anosmia, or the inability to smell. You also might notice that when you're away from a smell or a sound for a while, such as when you go on vacation and then return to your home, you notice it again.

It will probably not take much time for you to adapt to the sensory inputs of your environment and go "blind" to them once again. This requires a comprehensive and coordinated drive from multiple disciplines including but not limited to cellular, systems, computational, behavioral and cognitive neuroscience. Important Note : All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements.

Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review. With their unique mixes of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author. Research Topic Sensory Adaptation.

Unlike sensory adaptation, in which a large amount of stimulus is needed to incur any further responsive effects, in sensitization less and less stimulation is required to produce a large response.

For example, if an animal hears a loud noise and experiences pain at the same time, it will startle more intensely the next time it hears a loud noise even if there is no pain. There are many stimuli in life that we experience everyday and gradually ignore or forget, including sounds, images, and smells. Sensory adaptation and sensitization are thought to form an integral component of human learning and personality.

Privacy Policy. Skip to main content. Sensation and Perception. Search for:. Introduction to Sensation. Introduction to Sensation Sensation involves the relay of information from sensory receptors to the brain and enables a person to experience the world around them. Learning Objectives Explain how the brain and sensory receptors work together in the process of sensation.

Key Takeaways Key Points Sensation is input about the physical world registered by our sensory receptors, such as our eyes, ears, mouth, nose, and skin. Perception is the process by which the brain selects, organizes, and interprets sensations; it is often influenced by learning, memory, emotions, and expectations. The human senses include sight, sound, taste, smell, and touch, as well as kinesthesia and the vestibular senses. These neural impulses enter the cerebral cortex of the brain, where they are interpreted and organized in the process of perception.

Key Terms receptor : Any specialized cell or structure that responds to sensory stimuli. Sensory Absolute Thresholds The absolute threshold is the lowest intensity at which a stimulus can be detected.

Learning Objectives Explain what a sensory absolute threshold is and how it can be influenced. Key Takeaways Key Points The absolute threshold is the smallest detectable level of any kind of sensory stimulus.

Sensory adaptation happens when our senses no longer perceive a continuing stimulus. Key Terms sensory threshold : The point at which a stimulus causes a sensation within an individual; below the sensory threshold, there will be no sensation. Sensory Difference Thresholds The minimum amount of change in sensory stimulation needed to recognize that a change has occurred is known as the just-noticeable difference. Key Takeaways Key Points The just-noticeable difference JND is the smallest detectable difference between a starting and a secondary level of sensory stimulus.

This is the difference in the level of the stimulus needed for a person to recognize that a change has occurred. The absolute threshold is the lowest level at which a stimulus can be detected.