Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Significance: Fiber photometry is a powerful tool for neuroscience. However, measured biosensor signals are contaminated by various artifacts (photobleaching and movement-related noise) that undermine analysis and interpretation. Currently, no universal pipeline exists to deal with these artifacts. Aim: We aim to evaluate approaches for obtaining artifact-corrected neural dynamic signals from fiber photometry data and provide recommendations for photometry analysis pipelines. Approach: Using simulated and real photometry data, we tested the effects of three key analytical decisions: choice of regression for fitting isosbestic control signals onto experimental signals [ordinary least squares (OLS) versus iteratively reweighted least squares (IRLS)], low-pass filtering, and dF/F versus dF calculations. Results: IRLS surpassed OLS regression for fitting isosbestic control signals to experimental signals. We also demonstrate the efficacy of low-pass filtering signals and baseline normalization via dF/F calculations. Conclusions: We conclude that artifact-correcting experimental signals via low-pass filter, IRLS regression, and dF/F calculations is a superior approach to commonly used alternatives. We suggest these as a new standard for preprocessing signals across photometry analysis pipelines.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Keevers et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: