Tree-like structures are ubiquitous in nature. In particular, neuronal axons and dendrites have tree-like geometries that mediate electrical signaling within and between cells. Electrical activity in neuronal trees is typically modeled using coupled cable equations on multi-compartment representations, where each compartment represents a small segment of the neuronal membrane. The geometry of each compartment is usually defined as a cylinder or, at best, a surface of revolution based on a linear approximation of the radial change in the neurite. The resulting geometry of the model neuron is coarse, with non-smooth or even discontinuous jumps at the boundaries between compartments. We propose a hyperbolic approximation to model the geometry of neurite compartments, a branched, multi-compartment extension, and a simple graphical approach to calculate steady-state solutions of an associated system of coupled cable equations. A simple case of transient solutions is also briefly discussed.

Neural representations of odors are subject to computations that involve sequentially convergent and divergent anatomical connections across different areas of the brains in both mammals and insects. Furthermore, in both mammals and insects higher order brain areas are connected via feedback connections. In order to understand the transformations and interactions that this connectivity make possible, an ideal experiment would compare neural responses across different, sequential processing levels. Here we present results of recordings from a first order olfactory neuropile – the antennal lobe (AL) – and a higher order multimodal integration and learning center – the mushroom body (MB) – in the honey bee brain. We recorded projection neurons (PN) of the AL and extrinsic neurons (EN) of the MB, which provide the outputs from the two neuropils. Recordings at each level were made in different animals in some experiments and simultaneously in the same animal in others. We presented two odors and their mixture to compare odor response dynamics as well as classification speed and accuracy at each neural processing level. Surprisingly, the EN ensemble significantly starts separating odor stimuli rapidly and before the PN ensemble has reached significant separation. Furthermore the EN ensemble at the MB output reaches a maximum separation of odors between 84–120 ms after odor onset, which is 26 to 133 ms faster than the maximum separation at the AL output ensemble two synapses earlier in processing. It is likely that a subset of very fast PNs, which respond before the ENs, may initiate the rapid EN ensemble response. We suggest therefore that the timing of the EN ensemble activity would allow retroactive integration of its signal into the ongoing computation of the AL via centrifugal feedback.