PCOMPBIOL-D-24-01803

A comprehensive investigation of intracortical and corticothalamic models of alpha rhythms

PLOS Computational Biology

Dear Dr. Bastiaens,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Computational Biology. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Computational Biology's publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript within 30 days Mar 02 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at ploscompbiol@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pcompbiol/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

* A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. This file does not need to include responses to formatting updates and technical items listed in the 'Journal Requirements' section below.

* A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

* An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, competing interests statement, or data availability statement, please make these updates within the submission form at the time of resubmission. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jonathan David Touboul

Academic Editor

PLOS Computational Biology

Hugues Berry

Section Editor

PLOS Computational Biology

Journal Requirements:

1) Please ensure that the CRediT author contributions listed for every co-author are completed accurately and in full.

At this stage, the following Authors/Authors require contributions: Sorenza Pawla Bastiaens. Please ensure that the full contributions of each author are acknowledged in the "Add/Edit/Remove Authors" section of our submission form.

The list of CRediT author contributions may be found here: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/s/authorship#loc-author-contributions

2) We ask that a manuscript source file is provided at Revision. Please upload your manuscript file as a .doc, .docx, .rtf or .tex. If you are providing a .tex file, please upload it under the item type u2018LaTeX Source Fileu2019 and leave your .pdf version as the item type u2018Manuscriptu2019.

3) Please ensure that the Title in your manuscript file and the Title provided in your online submission form are the same.

4) Please provide an Author Summary. This should appear in your manuscript between the Abstract (if applicable) and the Introduction, and should be 150-200 words long. The aim should be to make your findings accessible to a wide audience that includes both scientists and non-scientists. Sample summaries can be found on our website under Submission Guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/s/submission-guidelines#loc-parts-of-a-submission

5) Please upload all main figures as separate Figure files in .tif or .eps format. For more information about how to convert and format your figure files please see our guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/s/figures

6) We have noticed that you have cited Table  Table 2 in the manuscript file but there is no corresponding table in the manuscript.  Please amend your manuscript to include this table noting that tables should not be uploaded as individual files.

7) We have noticed that you have uploaded Supporting Information files, but you have not included a list of legends. Please add a full list of legends for your Supporting Information files after the references list.

8) Some material included in your submission may be copyrighted. According to PLOSu2019s copyright policy, authors who use figures or other material (e.g., graphics, clipart, maps) from another author or copyright holder must demonstrate or obtain permission to publish this material under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License used by PLOS journals. Please closely review the details of PLOSu2019s copyright requirements here: PLOS Licenses and Copyright. If you need to request permissions from a copyright holder, you may use PLOS's Copyright Content Permission form.

Please respond directly to this email and provide any known details concerning your material's license terms and permissions required for reuse, even if you have not yet obtained copyright permissions or are unsure of your material's copyright compatibility. Once you have responded and addressed all other outstanding technical requirements, you may resubmit your manuscript within Editorial Manager.

Potential Copyright Issues:

- Figures: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 4A, 5A, 6A, and S11.. Please confirm whether you drew the images / clip-art within the figure panels by hand. If you did not draw the images, please provide (a) a link to the source of the images or icons and their license / terms of use; or (b) written permission from the copyright holder to publish the images or icons under our CC BY 4.0 license. Alternatively, you may replace the images with open source alternatives. See these open source resources you may use to replace images / clip-art:

- https://commons.wikimedia.org

- https://openclipart.org/.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Authors:

Please note here if the review is uploaded as an attachment.

Reviewer #1: Manuscript: A Comprehensive Investigation of Intracortical and Corticothalamic Models of the Alpha Rhythm

This manuscript provides a comparative analysis of neural population models (NPMs) used to simulate the alpha rhythms by focusing on four extensively studied models: Jansen-Rit (JR), Moran-David-Friston (MDF), Liley-Wright (LW), and Robinson-Rennie-Wright (RRW). The authors perform systemic comparison of the models' dynamics, including stability, parameter space, and bifurcation properties, in order to gain insights into the mechanisms underlying alpha generation.

Major Comments

1. In Section 3.2.1, the table comparing parameter values across the four models is a key strength of this study. However, the parameter values differ significantly across these models. A rational for parameter translation in the discussion section open more avenue for translatability of results across different models. As an example, a discussions subsection on how can model outputs be normalized for direct comparison could help direct future research in this field?

2. The authors heavily rely on linear stability analysis and potential nonlinear behaviors (e.g., chaotic dynamics) and their implications are not explored. While linearization is a standard tool, the omission of nonlinear dynamics could overlook some critical dynamical phenomenon. This limitation should be discussed in the manuscript. Perhaps in the discussion section.

3. The authors mention that the "Mesoscopic activity is more challenging to measure directly". However, the LFP could be used as reasonable proxy for mesoscopic neural activity as it reflects the average synaptic activity of local neuronal population. Hence, a brief discussion of how LFPs could be used as a proxy for mesoscopic neural activity could provide more context.

Typographical Errors

1. "top-down approach" is missing a hyphen in some locations.

2. Line 468 and 469: The words EC and EO are flipped in this sentence. Given that there is an attenuation of alpha activity during EO condition, the sentence should read: “….attenuated in EO compared to EC condition…”

3. Inconsistencies in references: For the reference on line 1054, the URL is written in a different font.

Conclusion

This manuscript is an impressive contribution to the modeling of alpha rhythms, offering a systematic and comparative framework for neural population models. And I believe addressing the above points will further enhance its impact and utility for the neuroscience community.

Reviewer #2: The paper is an excellent compendium of four mathematical models used for studying alpha rhythms. The authors detail the comparative advantages/features of the models in considerable detail. The study will no doubt be of value to specialists in the field. It is a pity that their analysis does not propose the experiments that would be necessary to select which of the models is the "correct" one, which weakens their work somewhat.

**********

Have the authors made all data and (if applicable) computational code underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data and code underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data and code should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data or code —e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Richa Phogat

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

Figure resubmission:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. If there are other versions of figure files still present in your submission file inventory at resubmission, please replace them with the PACE-processed versions.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that authors of applicable studies deposit laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Dear Ms Bastiaens,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'A comprehensive investigation of intracortical and corticothalamic models of the alpha rhythm' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Computational Biology.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, you will automatically be opted out of early publication. We ask that you notify us now if you or your institution is planning to press release the article. All press must be co-ordinated with PLOS.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Computational Biology. 

Best regards,

Jonathan David Touboul

Academic Editor

PLOS Computational Biology

Hugues Berry

Section Editor

PLOS Computational Biology

***********************************************************