Fast-scan cyclic voltammetry permits robust subsecond measurements of in vivo neurotransmitter dynamics, resulting in its established use in elucidating these species' roles in the actions of behaving animals. However, the technique's limitations, namely the need for digital background subtraction for analytical signal resolution, have restricted the information obtainable largely to that about phasic neurotransmitter release on the second-to-minute time scale. The study of basal levels of neurotransmitters and their dynamics requires a means of isolating the portion of the background current arising from neurotransmitter redox reactions. Previously, we reported on the use of a convolution-based method for prediction of the resistive-capacitive portion of the carbon-fiber microelectrode background signal, to improve the information content of background-subtracted data. Here we evaluated this approach for direct analytical signal isolation. First, protocol modifications (i.e., applied waveform and carbon-fiber type) were optimized to permit simplification of the interfering background current to components that are convolution-predictable. It was found that the use of holding potentials of at least 0.0 V, as well as the use of pitch-based carbon fibers, improved the agreement between convolution predictions and the observed background. Subsequently, it was shown that measurements of basal dopamine concentrations are possible with careful control of the electrode state. Successful use of this approach for measurement of in vivo basal dopamine levels is demonstrated, suggesting the approach may serve as a useful tool in expanding the capabilities of fast-scan cyclic voltammetry.
Fast-scan cyclic voltammetry permits robust subsecond measurements of in vivo neurotransmitter dynamics, resulting in its established use in elucidating these species' roles in the actions of behaving animals. However, the technique's limitations, namely the need for digital background subtraction for analytical signal resolution, have restricted the information obtainable largely to that about phasic neurotransmitter release on the second-to-minute time scale. The study of basal levels of neurotransmitters and their dynamics requires a means of isolating the portion of the background current arising from neurotransmitter redox reactions. Previously, we reported on the use of a convolution-based method for prediction of the resistive-capacitive portion of the carbon-fiber microelectrode background signal, to improve the information content of background-subtracted data. Here we evaluated this approach for direct analytical signal isolation. First, protocol modifications (i.e., applied waveform and carbon-fiber type) were optimized to permit simplification of the interfering background current to components that are convolution-predictable. It was found that the use of holding potentials of at least 0.0 V, as well as the use of pitch-based carbon fibers, improved the agreement between convolution predictions and the observed background. Subsequently, it was shown that measurements of basal dopamine concentrations are possible with careful control of the electrode state. Successful use of this approach for measurement of in vivo basal dopamine levels is demonstrated, suggesting the approach may serve as a useful tool in expanding the capabilities of fast-scan cyclic voltammetry.
Fast-scan
cyclic voltammetry
(FSCV) at carbon-fiber microelectrodes is a powerful tool for in vivo measurements of electroactive neurotransmitters.
Rapid scan rates enable high sensitivity measurements with subsecond
time resolution while providing selectivity for neurotransmitters
of interest (e.g., dopamine), which are often found at low concentrations
relative to other electroactive extracellular species like ascorbic
acid (AA) and 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC).[1] However, rapid potential changes generate large electrode
charging currents, mandating the use of digital background subtraction
for analytical current resolution.[2] Measurements
are then limited to relative neurotransmitter changes on the time
scale of background stability, restricting the use of the technique
primarily to investigation of phasic neurotransmission. Information
about absolute (i.e., basal) neurotransmitter concentrations, governed
by phasic and tonic neuronal activity and believed to underlie important
neurobiological phenomena,[3−7] is lost in the background-subtraction step. Studies of basal concentrations
have consequently largely been the domain of microdialysis.[8−11] Microdialysis, coupled with an appropriate analysis technique, is
readily capable of low- to subnanomolar detection of a variety of
neurotransmitters, potentially simultaneously.[12−14] As such, it
has been able to provide a unique window into basal neurotransmitter
levels, the information content encoded within them, and their correlation
with behavior.[15] The major traditional
limitations reported on accessible information with microdialysis
have stemmed from the relatively large size of microdialysis probes
(typically a few hundred microns in diameter), coupled with the time
needed to collect adequate sample volumes for robust analysis. These
result in relatively low spatiotemporal resolution, hindering insight
into fine details of localized and/or phasic neurotransmission, and
also generate concerns about the effects of probe insertion on measurement
fidelity.[16] However, recent advancements,
such as in the areas of probe fabrication (e.g., microfabrication),[17,18] sampling methods (e.g., segmented flow and droplet microfluidics),[19,20] and modulation of the immune response around the probe (e.g., delivery
of the anti-inflammatory drug dexamethasone),[21,22] have been reported to address these issues, effectively expanding
the phenomena that may be accessible for study with microdialysis.[23]Likewise, there has been a focus on altering
the experimental protocols
deployed with FSCV to access a wider array of neurochemical information
and, in particular, generate data complementary to microdialysis concerning
basal neurotransmitter concentrations. One reported approach has been
the use of pharmacological agents with known effects, along with rapid
drug administration techniques (i.e., microinfusion and intravenous
administration), to manipulate neuronal release on an FSCV-compatible
time scale.[6] Additionally, multivariate
data analysis (i.e., principal component regression) has been used
to account for background artifacts appearing in the digitally subtracted
data through incorporation of “background” voltammograms
into the model, allowing for in vivo measurements
of long-term dopamine concentration shifts following cocaine administration.[24] Alternatively, modifications to measurement
parameters have been explored. In a series of reports, Heien and colleagues
have introduced fast-scan controlled adsorption voltammetry (FSCAV),
a technique altering the waveform application frequency to modulate
analyte adsorption behavior.[25,26] Periods of rapid voltammetric
scanning (100 Hz) are alternated with quiescent periods (∼10
s) at negative potentials to promote robust adsorptive preconcentration.
Information from the initial scanning period allows determination
of basal neurotransmitter concentrations, while analyte removal, and
thus a blank background measurement, is achieved through continued
rapid scanning prior to another preconcentration phase. The technique’s
success for basal neurotransmitter measurement has been demonstrated
in both brain slices and in vivo experiments.[7,27,28]Recently, we reported on
an alternative measurement protocol that
relies on convolution to predict and remove nonfaradaic portions of
the carbon-fiber FSCV background current.[29] A small step placed immediately before each FSCV sweep is used to
probe the electrode impedance and estimate its impulse response function
through discrete differentiation. Convolution of this with the FSCV
waveform allows prediction and digital subtraction of the nonfaradaic
background signal. In the previous study, it was found that this approach
only accounted for a portion of the total background current (i.e.,
that behaving like classical double-layer charging across the potential
window), due mainly to the nonidealities introduced by a surface redox-active
species (i.e., a quinone-like species). These moieties were observed
to create a capacitive asymmetry across the potential window studied
(between −0.6 and 1.3 V vs Ag/AgCl), apparently due to their
redox state-dependent interactions with cations. Thus, the technique
was explored for its potential to remove interferences in background-subtracted
data introduced by ionic species affecting the predictable portion
of the background in this potential range, and its success at removing
these was demonstrated in vitro and in vivo.[29−31] Here, we seek to explore further protocol changes to circumvent
the nonidealities introduced by the quinone-like species and achieve
more complete background removal. It is hypothesized that this will
enable this technique to be used for direct resolution of the analytical
current against this background to study basal neurotransmitter levels.Here, we specifically explore modification of the waveform holding
potential (to those positive of the commonly employed −0.4
V vs Ag/AgCl), as well as alternative carbon-fiber materials (i.e.,
pitch-based vs polyacrylonitrile-based), as a means to address these
issues. While negative holding potentials promote adsorption of catecholamines,
their use, combined with extensive oxidation of the electrode, exacerbates
the current asymmetry across the potential window stemming from surface-active
redox species.[32] Thus, the use of holding
potentials positive of the surface species’ redox potential
is anticipated to mitigate these issues, albeit at the cost of sensitivity.
Further, it will be shown that changing the carbon fiber used results
in changes in the impedance characteristics that complement the convolution-based
technique, though this results in a further decrease in sensitivity.
However, there are other means of increasing sensitivity, namely the
use of the higher scan rates and modulation of waveform application
frequencies. It is shown that these strategies enable successful deployment
of convolution-based background prediction to enable direct resolution
of the analytical neurotransmitter current and access to information
about the levels of, and changes in, basal neurotransmitter levels.
Experimental
Section
Instrumentation and Software
T-650 (PAN-, or polyacrylonitrile-,
based) and P-55 (pitch-based) type, cylindrical carbon-fiber microelectrodes
(Thornel, Amoco Corporation, Greenville, SC; pulled in glass capillaries
and cut to 50–100 μm exposed lengths) were used. Pulled
electrodes were treated with epoxy as outlined in ref (29), as such treatment has
been shown to result in beneficial changes to the electrical characteristics
of the electrodes.[31] Data was acquired
in grounded Faraday cages, using a commercial interface (PCI-6052,
16 bit, National instruments, Austin TX) with a personal home computer
and analyzed using locally constructed hardware and software (HDCV)
written in LabVIEW (National Instruments, Austin, TX).[33] Analog background subtraction (ABS) was implemented
using the design described elsewhere.[24] Of note, with the use of the convolution-based method, ABS current
fed into the headstage was recorded separately and digitally added
back to the measured data prior to convolution.
Electrochemical
Experiments
Flow injection analysis
experiments were performed using a syringe pump (Harvard Apparatus,
Holliston, MA) operated at 0.8 mL/min using PEEK tubing (Sigma-Aldrich)
connected to a pneumatically controlled six-port injection valve (Rheodyne,
Rohnert Park, CA). All solutions were prepared in TRIS buffer (2.0
mM Na2SO4, 1.25 mM NaH2PO4·H2O, 140 mM NaCl, 3.25 KCl, 1.2 mM CaCl2·2H2O, 1.2 mM MgCl2·6H2O, and 15 mM Trizma HCl), adjusted to pH 7.4 with NaOH as necessary.
Dopamine solutions were bubbled with nitrogen to prevent oxidative
degradation. The tyramine fouling experiments follow the protocol
described by Takmakov et al.[34] However,
the negative, not positive, potential limits were varied (−0.4
and 0.0 vs Ag/AgCl) during the recovery phase. Additionally, both
waveforms (randomized order, n = 5 electrodes) were
tested at each electrode, followed by conditioning and re-evaluation
of the sensitivity before fouling.The convolution-based approach
used here is described in ref (21). Briefly, a waveform with a small amplitude pulse placed
immediately prior to the FSCV sweep is used. The derivative of the
step current (i.e., the system impulse response estimate) is convoluted
with the applied waveform to generate a nonfaradaic current prediction,
which is digitally subtracted.
In Vivo Measurements
Male Sprague–Dawley
rats from Charles River (Wilmington, MA, USA) were pair-housed on
a 12/12 h light/dark cycle. Animal procedures were approved by the
UNC-Chapel Hill Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC).
For anesthetized experiments, animals (200–400 g) were administered
urethane (1.5 mg/kg i.p.), and holes were drilled above the nucleus
accumbens shell (AP + 1.7 mm, ML + 0.8 mm, DV −6.0 to −8.0
mm) and the contralateral hemisphere for lowering of the working and
reference electrode, respectively. Additionally, a bipolar stimulating
electrode (Plastics One, Roanoke, VA) was implanted at the ipsilateral
ventral tegmental area (−2 mm, ML + 1.0 mm, DV −8.4
to −8.8 mm) to assist in positioning the working electrode.
Results and Discussion
Effect of Negative Holding Potentials on
Background Currents
Waveforms with negative holding potentials
are standard for FSCVcatecholamine measurements, as they provide increased sensitivity
by promoting adsorption.[32] Here, the effect
of using negative holding potentials on the observed background currents
at carbon-fiber electrodes was evaluated.
Current at Negative Holding
Potentials
Figure A shows backgrounds collected
using increasingly positive holding potentials. As reported previously,
the background decreases in both magnitude and complexity with more
positive holding potentials.[34,35] During FSCV waveform
application, the electrode is held at the holding potential for the
majority of the measurement window (typically <90%), although data
is not typically collected during this time. However, current can
often be observed throughout this period, which, after the return
to the holding potential, decays to a steady state value proportional
to that potential (Figure B). To understand its origin, slow-scan cyclic voltammetry
(80 mV/s) was used (Figure C). The obtained voltammogram resembles that expected for
the oxygen reduction reaction at a microelectrode, a two-step redox
process that generates hydrogen peroxide at low overpotentials.[36,37] Such a reaction was indeed suggested in the original report on the
use of negative holding potentials and has been used recently to generate
a microfabricated oxygen sensor.[32,38] If one assumes
the holding potential current originates from this reaction, Faraday’s
law (n = It/Fz, z = 2 and I = 5 nA for −0.4 V) and
the diffusion distance (x2 = 6Dt, DH = 1.8 × 10–5 cm2/s) suggest that the average concentration
of peroxide around the electrode is above 1 μM after one holding
period (∼92 ms).[39] Further, collection
of fast-scan voltammograms (400 V/s) using differing waveform application
frequencies (0.5–30 Hz) indicates that this generated peroxide
may be oxidized during the forward scan (Figure D). Using the 30 Hz waveform as the reference,
differential CVs collected at lower frequencies have a peak that grows
larger with increases in time at the holding potential (here, −0.4
V).
Figure 1
Effects of negative holding potentials at carbon-fiber microelectrodes
in TRIS buffer. (A) Fast-scan background voltammograms taken with
different holding potentials (−0.5, −0.3, −0.1,
and 0.0 V vs Ag/AgCl). (B) Amperometric current at various negative
potentials over 5 min window at various holding potentials (0.0 to
−0.8 V). (C) Slow scan voltammogram (80 mV/s, +0.7 to −1.7
V, forward scan shown only) showing significant redox current in the
negative potential region. (D) Subtracted fast-scan voltammograms
taken at various application frequencies (0.5–20 Hz), using
the voltammograms taken at 30 Hz as the blank signal.
Effects of negative holding potentials at carbon-fiber microelectrodes
in TRIS buffer. (A) Fast-scan background voltammograms taken with
different holding potentials (−0.5, −0.3, −0.1,
and 0.0 V vs Ag/AgCl). (B) Amperometric current at various negative
potentials over 5 min window at various holding potentials (0.0 to
−0.8 V). (C) Slow scan voltammogram (80 mV/s, +0.7 to −1.7
V, forward scan shown only) showing significant redox current in the
negative potential region. (D) Subtracted fast-scan voltammograms
taken at various application frequencies (0.5–20 Hz), using
the voltammograms taken at 30 Hz as the blank signal.
Electrode Surface Regeneration
It
is known that the
use of high positive potentials (>1.0 V) promotes etching of the
carbon-fiber
surface, which can be advantageous for maintaining sensitivity in
the in vivo environment.[34] However, the role of the negative holding potential in this process
has not been characterized. To study this, a tyramine electrode fouling
experiment, originally used to understand the positive potential limit
effect, was carried out (Figure A). Carbon-fiber microelectrodes were fouled through
electro-oxidation of tyramine, forming a surface film that decreases
electrode capacitance and sensitivity. The negative holding potential’s
effect on film removal and surface renewal was evaluated by application
of a waveform with a positive potential limit known to promote etching
(+1.3 V) and one of two negative holding potentials (−0.4 or
0.0 V). Successful removal was evaluated through dopamine sensitivity
testing (−0.4 to 1.0 waveform). Both waveforms were tested
at each electrode, using a randomized order and conditioning the electrode
on a full waveform (−0.4 to 1.3 V) prior to fouling. The results
are summarized in Figure B. The sensitivity was significantly lower after the use of
the 0.0 V holding potential during the surface renewal phase than
prior to fouling or after treatment. This suggests that a process
occurring at negative potentials promotes this etching and surface
renewal, driving the electrode surface evolution. While the specifics
of this process are unknown, the generation of peroxide or interactions
between the oxidized carbon surface and cations may underlie this
phenomenon.[40,41]
Figure 2
Sensitivity testing after tyramine fouling
and treatment with waveforms
with differing holding potentials. (A) Schematic of the experimental
design. The arrow indicates that the order of waveform treatment (either
0.0 or −0.4 holding potential waveforms) was randomized. (B)
Normalized peak currents observed for 1.0 μM of dopamine after
each step in the experiment.
Sensitivity testing after tyramine fouling
and treatment with waveforms
with differing holding potentials. (A) Schematic of the experimental
design. The arrow indicates that the order of waveform treatment (either
0.0 or −0.4 holding potential waveforms) was randomized. (B)
Normalized peak currents observed for 1.0 μM of dopamine after
each step in the experiment.
Convolution-Based Removal of Divalent Cation Interferences
Overall, these data suggest that some of the complexity and temporal
evolution of carbon-fiber FSCV backgrounds stem from processes occurring
at negative potentials. Further, as discussed in ref (29), the voltammetric waves
(0.0 V and −0.3 V on the forward and backward scans in Figure A, respectively)
originating from surface-bound, quinone-like species introduce capacitive
nonidealities, increasing this complexity. In the context of convolution-based
nonfaradaic current prediction, these effects are nonideal, as they
introduce nonlinear features that cannot be modeled in this manner.
However, it was hypothesized that the use of more positive holding
potentials (≥0.0 V) would allow such issues to be avoided.Previous deployment of the convolution-based approach with negative
holding potentials (≤−0.4 V) found that only a subset
of ionic signals was able to be successfully removed (i.e., those
with traditional double-layer charging voltammograms). Other ions
studied (i.e., the divalent cations Mg2+ and Ca2+) had more complex signals arising from interactions with surface
quinone-like species, introducing nonlinearities that cannot be handled
with the convolution-based method. For instance, Figure A shows the background-subtracted
signal from a MgCl2-doped TRIS buffer using a holding potential
of −0.5 V. Due to the capacitive asymmetry across the potential
window, the use of the convolution-based method predicts an incorrectly
large capacitive signal in the positive potential region. This results
in strong artifacts in this region after prediction subtraction. However,
avoidance of the potential region in which the quinone-like species
undergoes its redox reaction avoids this issue, resulting in a considerably
smaller ionic signal that can be successfully predicted with the convolution-based
method (Figure B).
This, in turn, permits dopamine signal resolution when flow injection
analysis is performed for a mixture of MgCl2 and dopamine
(Figure C).
Figure 3
Removal of
ionic artifacts seen during flow injection analysis
of magnesium in TRIS buffer. (A-B) Raw (left) and convolution-treated
(right) background-subtracted color plots using waveforms with −0.5
V (A) and 0.0 V (B) holding potentials. (C) Raw (left) and convolution-treated
(right) background-subtracted color plots during flow injection analysis
of a Mg2+-dopamine mixture.
Removal of
ionic artifacts seen during flow injection analysis
of magnesium in TRIS buffer. (A-B) Raw (left) and convolution-treated
(right) background-subtracted color plots using waveforms with −0.5
V (A) and 0.0 V (B) holding potentials. (C) Raw (left) and convolution-treated
(right) background-subtracted color plots during flow injection analysis
of a Mg2+-dopamine mixture.Thus, the use of more positive holding potentials does indeed
allow
natural attenuation and convolution-based removal of a larger set
of interferences. A similar attenuation was seen for signals caused
by local pH changes (data not shown), which arise primarily through
modulating the redox current of the quinone-like species. Overall,
this is anticipated to allow for more complete isolation of neurotransmitter
signals in unstable ionic environments. Additionally, longer measurements
may be possible than with traditional FSCV protocols as background
changes should be more successfully modeled and removed.
Optimization
of Background Current for Prediction
Effect of Carbon Precursor
The use of more positive
holding potentials should also make the background itself more amenable
to convolution-based prediction. As noted in the previous report,
considerable residual background current remained after prediction
subtraction when using negative holding potentials, mandating background
subtraction still be used for signal resolution. However, backgrounds
observed with more positive holding potentials (representative background
shown in Figure A,
0.0 V holding potential, purple line) resemble largely exponential
charging curves, suggesting the convolution-based method may be able
to more completely model it.With the changes in the background
seen at more positive holding potentials and attenuation of its redox
current component, however, the fiber impedance characteristics become
the dominant factor governing the background. Thus, two types of fibers
(polyacrylonitrile- and pitch-based, referring to the carbon source)
were evaluated to determine if one was preferable for use with the
convolution-based approach. Traditionally, polyacrylonitrile (PAN)-based
carbon fibers are used for FSCV, although pitch-based fibers have
been explored. Of note, previous comparisons of the two found that
the carbon precursor did not significantly affect the ability to detect
neurotransmitters, although differences in electrochemical kinetics
and sensitivity have been noted.[42] PAN-based
fibers, however, tend to have lower degrees of crystallinity, higher
electrical resistivity, and lower densities (due to increased porosity).[43] Thus, differences in impedance characteristics
are expected. To explore this, apparent capacitances were determined
from electrode backgrounds for two fibers (T-650, PAN; P-55, pitch)
using cyclic voltammetry. The apparent capacitance was measured using
the following equationwhere C is
the apparent capacitance, v is the scan rate (here,
400 V/s), and ip and in are the current amplitudes on the positive and negative
sweeps, respectively. Figure A shows a representative set of apparent capacitances for
the fibers at a range of times after capacitive charging (0.4 to 1.2
ms, corresponding to 0.16 to 0.48 V), along with a current trace during
a step application for reference. In our previous report, we noted
that the step current could not be adequately modeled by single-order
exponential decay, suggesting time-varying impedance characteristics.
Here, the PAN-based fiber (orange) shows a stronger time-dependence
(increase of 7.6 μF/cm2 over this range) in the apparent
capacitance relative to the pitch-based fiber (green, 1.6 μF/cm2). While the origin of these differences is uncertain, we
hypothesize that the porosity of the PAN-based fibers plays a role,
since porous carbons often exhibit multiple time constants due to
these pores.[44] Of note, this impedance
variation occurs on a time scale that places information about it
later in the step current (dashed line), where the signal-to-noise
ratio is lower (and decreases with differentiation). The necessity
of relying on this portion for capturing such changes in the impedance
makes the use of the T-650 PAN-based fibers less useful than P-55
pitch-based fibers for convolution-based prediction.
Figure 4
Evaluation of impedance
characteristics and sensitivity of T-650
PAN-based and P-55 pitch-based carbon fibers (A) Apparent capacitance
for T-650 PAN (orange) and P-55 pitch (green) fibers determined from
a voltage sweep (400 V/s, 0.0 to 0.9 V vs Ag/AgCl) after capacitive
charging (0.4–1.2 ms, corresponding to 0.16–0.48 V).
A representative step current trace is shown on the same time scale
for reference. (B) Peak current observed for dopamine oxidation (−0.4
to 1.3 V waveform) at both fiber types (n = 5 electrodes;
error bars correspond to standard deviation).
Evaluation of impedance
characteristics and sensitivity of T-650
PAN-based and P-55 pitch-based carbon fibers (A) Apparent capacitance
for T-650 PAN (orange) and P-55 pitch (green) fibers determined from
a voltage sweep (400 V/s, 0.0 to 0.9 V vs Ag/AgCl) after capacitive
charging (0.4–1.2 ms, corresponding to 0.16–0.48 V).
A representative step current trace is shown on the same time scale
for reference. (B) Peak current observed for dopamine oxidation (−0.4
to 1.3 V waveform) at both fiber types (n = 5 electrodes;
error bars correspond to standard deviation).P-55 pitch-based fibers were used in the remaining experiments.
To evaluate the analytical potential of these fibers, their sensitivity
toward dopamine was determined and compared to the T-650 fibers (Figure B, 400 V/s, n = 5 electrodes). A decrease of approximately 60% (−0.4
to 1.3 V waveform; fiber type: slope ± S.E.,
T-650: 10.7 ± 0.3 nA/μM, P-55: 6.3 ± 0.3 nA/μM;
ANCOVA comparison of slopes, F(1,6) = 71.26, p <
0.001) was observed. This sensitivity decline agrees with the previous
comparison of these two fibers for another catecholamine, norepinephrine.[42] The use of a more positive holding potential
(0.0 vs −0.4 V) further decreased the sensitivity of the fibers
to dopamine by approximately 25% at 400 V/s (data not shown). Despite
this, the agreement between the convolution-based prediction and fiber
background current is high under these latter conditions (Figure A). After subtraction
(Figure B), only ∼2.5%
of the total signal remains. In particular, the fit to the forward
sweep (inset) at potentials below +0.8 V is robust, permitting the
use of information in this region directly. Of note, above this voltage,
a peak is seen, likely attributable to extraneous oxidation reactions.[32] Additionally, slight mismatches between the
prediction and measurement timings produce artifacts around the switching
potentials.
Figure 5
Prediction and removal of background currents using 0.0 V holding
potential. (A) Measured (dashed black line) and predicted (orange
line) from the convolution-based method. (B) Residual current after
prediction subtraction, with a magnified inset. These data (average
of 5 CVs, Bessel 4th order low-pass digital filter with 2 kHz cutoff)
were collected with a 100 mV step placed 750 μs before a 400
V/s sweep in TRIS buffer at an unconditioned P-55 fiber.
Prediction and removal of background currents using 0.0 V holding
potential. (A) Measured (dashed black line) and predicted (orange
line) from the convolution-based method. (B) Residual current after
prediction subtraction, with a magnified inset. These data (average
of 5 CVs, Bessel 4th order low-pass digital filter with 2 kHz cutoff)
were collected with a 100 mV step placed 750 μs before a 400
V/s sweep in TRIS buffer at an unconditioned P-55 fiber.
Use of High Scan Rates
This lowered
sensitivity resulting
from these changes must be addressed for robust in vivo measurements. Traditional approaches for FSCV sensitivity enhancement
include longer periods for adsorptive analyte preconcentration (e.g.,
lower waveform application frequencies) or higher scan rates.[45−47] The latter approach does not sacrifice temporal resolution and is
compatible with the convolution-based procedure. With higher scan
rates, the high frequency impedance dominates the observed behavior.
This leads to greater overlap of the sweep frequency components with
the highest signal-to-noise region of the impulse response (Figure S-2A). As the focus here is high temporal
resolution, scan rate modulation was the preferred means of sensitivity
enhancement and is characterized here, with application frequency
serving as a useful adjunct for further increases when necessary (see
below).As expected for adsorbed species, the sensitivity increased
linearly with scan rate (Figure A).[48] Positive shifts in
the dopamine peak potential were also observed, attributable to slow
electron transfer kinetics.[1,47] There was also proportional
background current amplification, mandating the use of analog background
subtraction (ABS) to avoid saturation of the A/D converter used.[24] With ABS, maximum scan rates of 4000–6000
V/s were attainable, the limit being determined by individual electrode
impedances. This proved sufficient for in vitro convolution-based
resolution of a dopamine signal. Figure B shows an example for dopamine solutions
(TRIS buffer; 5000 V/s at 10 Hz) at an unconditioned P-55 fiber. It
was first verified that the background could be predicted in a blank
solution (black line). Addition of dopamine resulted in the appearance
of a signal at approximately 0.9 V (orange line), which increased
in a linear manner with subsequent additions.
Figure 6
Use of high scan rates
for dopamine detection. (A) Peak current
observed for 1 μM dopamine oxidation as a function of scan rate.
(B) Prediction-subtracted background voltammograms (5000 V/s, 10 Hz,
forward sweep only) taken in TRIS buffer (black) and after sequential
additions of dopamine (total concentrations of 100, 250, 500, 750,
and 1000 nM).
Use of high scan rates
for dopamine detection. (A) Peak current
observed for 1 μM dopamine oxidation as a function of scan rate.
(B) Prediction-subtracted background voltammograms (5000 V/s, 10 Hz,
forward sweep only) taken in TRIS buffer (black) and after sequential
additions of dopamine (total concentrations of 100, 250, 500, 750,
and 1000 nM).
Electrode Oxidation State
An established method for
increasing sensitivity has been electrochemical conditioning (i.e.,
intentional surface oxide introduction). However, it was found that
extended electrode oxidation can result in the unexpected appearance
of a secondary background peak near the dopamine oxidation potential. Supplementary Figure S-2 shows an example of
this peak seen during in vitro analysis of an extensively
oxidized electrode in TRIS buffer alone after removal from the brain.
It was found that the peak amplitude varied linearly with scan rate
(data not shown). This suggests that this may be due to a surface
redox-active functional group, which, due to its small contribution
at lower scan rates (∼20 nA at 400 V/s), was not previously
apparent. Fortuitously, the peak did not appear significantly responsive
to local ionic changes (data not shown) and appears not to introduce
nonidealities like those associated with the surface quinone-like
species. Thus, given stability in this background signal, background
subtraction can be used to resolve changes in basal levels in dopamine
over long periods (not shown). However, the presence of this peak
does prevent direct determination of the basal concentrations of dopamine.
For this, the electrode state must be carefully controlled to prevent
significant formation of the underlying species.
Selectivity
An important concern when conducting basal
level measurements is the selectivity of such measurements over common
interfering agents. Of particular concern are ascorbic acid (AA) and
3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), which are found at orders
of magnitude larger concentrations in vivo than the
low nanomolar levels expected for dopamine.[1] To evaluate this aspect of the measurements, the sensitivity for
these two interfering agents at the dopamine oxidation potential was
determined at unoxidized electrodes (10 Hz, 0.0–1.2 V vs Ag/AgCl
waveform, 5000 V/s; Supplementary Table S-1). Minimal responses were seen for either interfering agent, which
is attributed to the slow electron transfer kinetics at unoxidized
electrodes and the high scan rate used.[32]
In Vivo Measurement of Dopamine
Measurement
of Basal Concentrations in Anesthetized Rats
First, the potential
of the technique for measuring basal concentrations
of dopamine was evaluated. For this experiment, an unconditioned electrode
was first positioned in the cortex (−1.5 mm DV) and allowed
to stabilize with the step-sweep convolution waveform. Measurements
collected here (Figure A, black) were used to verify the lack of significant background
contributions from the electrode. Subsequently, the electrode was
lowered into the nucleus accumbens, using release evoked by electrical
stimulation of the ventral tegmental area (VTA) for optimum placement,
and allowed to stabilize.
Figure 7
In vivo measurement of basal
dopamine levels in
an anesthetized rat. (A) Convolution-prediction background voltammograms
(5000 V/s scan rate, forward sweep only) in the cortex (−1.5
mm DV; 10 Hz waveform application frequency) and the nucleus accumbens
(NAc; −7.0 mm DV; 10, 5, 2, or 1 Hz waveform application frequency,
shown in green, orange, and purple, respectively). (B) Comparison
of background voltammogram with convolution prediction-subtracted
voltammogram (black, 1 Hz) and digital background-subtracted, electrically
evoked voltammogram.
In vivo measurement of basal
dopamine levels in
an anesthetized rat. (A) Convolution-prediction background voltammograms
(5000 V/s scan rate, forward sweep only) in the cortex (−1.5
mm DV; 10 Hz waveform application frequency) and the nucleus accumbens
(NAc; −7.0 mm DV; 10, 5, 2, or 1 Hz waveform application frequency,
shown in green, orange, and purple, respectively). (B) Comparison
of background voltammogram with convolution prediction-subtracted
voltammogram (black, 1 Hz) and digital background-subtracted, electrically
evoked voltammogram.After stabilization, an upward deflection of the signal was
observed
around the dopamine oxidation potential (Figure A, green) in the convolution-treated background
voltammograms. However, given the low sensitivity of the electrode
(likely exacerbated by in vivo fouling), robust measurements
could not be made of the basal dopamine concentration under the initial
experimental conditions (5000 V/s, 0.0 V holding potential, 10 Hz).
To increase the sensitivity, the waveform application frequency was
lowered, which resulted in an increase in the signal (Figure A, orange, purple, and brown
for 5, 2, and 1 Hz, respectively). Of note, the voltammograms obtained
compared favorably to those obtained by electrical stimulation and
digital background subtraction in the same region (Figure B).Basal dopamine concentration
measurements (n =
3 rats) were then made using the 1 Hz waveform application frequency.
For this, the current at the peak potential, after the subtraction
of the convolution prediction from the total voltammogram, was used
to generate the estimates (i.e., the current at the peak potential
from the convolution estimate was used as the “zero”
estimate). Postexperiment in vitro calibration was
used to generate specific calibration factors for each electrode (representative
calibration curve shown in Supplementary Figure S-3), and the estimates were obtained by averaging 30 voltammograms
(30 s time bin) after electrode stabilization (representative trace
shown in Supplementary Figure S-4). Of
note, the electrode response to AA (200 μM) and DOPAC (20 μM)
was tested to ensure no significant contribution to the current at
the dopamine peak potential was observed. Additionally, delivery of
raclopride (2 mg/kg, i.p., a D2 dopamine receptor antagonist)
resulted in a 180 ± 20% (mean ± S.E.M.) increase in the
signal at dopamine oxidation potential after 30 min.These experiments
generated an estimate of basal dopamine levels
of 41 ± 13 nM (mean ± S.E.M.) in the rodent nucleus accumbens.
This is slightly higher than estimates in the striatum reported by
Gonan and Buda using slow electrochemical recordings (25 nM)[49] in anesthetized (with chloral hydrate) rats
and by Owesson-White et al. from FSCV paired with pharmacological
manipulation (20–30 nM) in awake, freely moving Sprague–Dawley
rats.[6] All of these results are higher
than those that tend to be reported using microdialysis. For example,
Shou et al., using microdialysis coupled with online electrokinetic
chromatography, reported a value of 18 nM in anesthetized (with ketamine/domitor)
Sprague–Dawley rats,[12] while Oslund
et al. reported significantly lower values throughout the striatum
(0.83, 0.73, 1.46, and 0.96 nM for the nucleus accumbens core, nucleus
accumbens shell, dorsolateral striatum, and dorsomedial striatum,
respectively) in awake, freely moving Long-Evans rats.[15] While the origin of the discrepancies is unclear,
the effect of probe size and damage, sensor placement/natural variability
in the brain, the effects of anesthetic drugs, and the animal model
used may play a role. Regardless, this experiment demonstrates another
means of generating estimates of basal extracellular dopamine levels,
expanding the approaches available to attempt to obtain their precise
values. It is worth noting, however, that the lower sensitivity of
the method, as compared to a technique like FSCAV, leads to less robust
estimates of the extracellular dopamine concentration, albeit at higher
temporal resolution.
Conclusions
High
scan rates, holding potentials at or positive of 0.0 V vs
Ag/AgCl, and alternative carbon-fiber materials facilitate the use
of the convolution procedure for prediction and removal of the majority
of the background current. With this background removed, information
about basal levels of neurotransmitters, as demonstrated here for
dopamine, can be accessed. However, as highlighted, measurement of
absolute levels of dopamine requires careful control of the electrode
state, typically requiring conditions that lead to low sensitivity.
Further study is needed to optimize the electrode pretreatment and
experimental waveform limits to maximize sensitivity without generating
interfering signals. The instrumentation deployed here placed an upper
limit on the achievable scan rate, and it is anticipated that further
sensitivity increases could be gained with higher scan rates. Additionally,
the work presented here exclusively focuses on the use of the positive
sweep for measuring dopamine levels. However, greater confidence in
signal assignment and quantification can be gained through measurement
of the reductive wave, which requires addition of a negative potential
excursion on the negative sweep. Preliminary studies suggest that
the use of lower scan rates for the negative sweep may be a useful
tool in this approach, allowing for robust measurement of the reductive
wave within moderate potential limits (i.e., preventing severe reductive
peak shifting). Finally, while not the focus here, it should be noted
that the strategies employed here appear to be beneficial in signal
isolation for traditional background-subtracted FSCV measurements,
where the requirement for impedance ideality can be relaxed. Initial
work suggests that this may be a promising route for lengthening the
time that neurotransmitter fluctuations can be measured.
Authors: Jing Zhang; Andrea Jaquins-Gerstl; Kathryn M Nesbitt; Sarah C Rutan; Adrian C Michael; Stephen G Weber Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2013-09-24 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Pavel Takmakov; Matthew K Zachek; Richard B Keithley; Elizabeth S Bucher; Gregory S McCarty; R Mark Wightman Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2010-11-03 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Yoonbae Oh; Cheonho Park; Do Hyoung Kim; Hojin Shin; Yu Min Kang; Mark DeWaele; Jeyeon Lee; Hoon-Ki Min; Charles D Blaha; Kevin E Bennet; In Young Kim; Kendall H Lee; Dong Pyo Jang Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2016-11-02 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Aya Abdalla; Christopher W Atcherley; Pavithra Pathirathna; Srimal Samaranayake; Beidi Qiang; Edsel Peña; Stephen L Morgan; Michael L Heien; Parastoo Hashemi Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2017-09-07 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Dmitriy A Dikin; Sasha Stankovich; Eric J Zimney; Richard D Piner; Geoffrey H B Dommett; Guennadi Evmenenko; SonBinh T Nguyen; Rodney S Ruoff Journal: Nature Date: 2007-07-26 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Aya Abdalla; Alyssa West; Yunju Jin; Rachel A Saylor; Beidi Qiang; Edsel Peña; David J Linden; H Frederik Nijhout; Michael C Reed; Janet Best; Parastoo Hashemi Journal: J Neurochem Date: 2019-11-28 Impact factor: 5.372
Authors: Vladimir P Grinevich; Amir N Zakirov; Uliana V Berseneva; Elena V Gerasimova; Raul R Gainetdinov; Evgeny A Budygin Journal: Cells Date: 2022-05-03 Impact factor: 7.666
Authors: Jaekyung Kim; Abhijeet S Barath; Aaron E Rusheen; Juan M Rojas Cabrera; J Blair Price; Hojin Shin; Abhinav Goyal; Jason W Yuen; Danielle E Jondal; Charles D Blaha; Kendall H Lee; Dong Pyo Jang; Yoonbae Oh Journal: ACS Omega Date: 2021-03-03
Authors: Abhinav Goyal; Sangmun Hwang; Aaron E Rusheen; Charles D Blaha; Kevin E Bennet; Kendall H Lee; Dong Pyo Jang; Yoonbae Oh; Hojin Shin Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2022-09-23 Impact factor: 5.152