Synchronous activity in populations of neurons potentially encodes special stimulus features. Selective readout of either synchronous or asynchronous activity allows formation of two streams of information processing. Theoretical work predicts that such a synchrony code is a fundamental feature of populations of spiking neurons if they operate in specific noise and stimulus regimes. Here we experimentally test the theoretical predictions by quantifying and comparing neuronal response properties in tuberous and ampullary electroreceptor afferents of the weakly electric fish Apteronotus leptorhynchus. These related systems show similar levels of synchronous activity, but only in the more irregularly firing tuberous afferents a synchrony code is established, whereas in the more regularly firing ampullary afferents it is not. The mere existence of synchronous activity is thus not sufficient for a synchrony code. Single-cell features such as the irregularity of spiking and the frequency dependence of the neuron's transfer function determine whether synchronous spikes possess a distinct meaning for the encoding of time-dependent signals. Because of the strong nonlinearity of the spiking threshold, neural noise can be beneficial by improving the representation of stimuli in populations of spiking neurons (3-7). Noise reduces the precision with which spikes lock to the stimulus (1). In populations of neurons that share a common input, for example by having overlapping receptive fields, noise as well as population heterogeneity has the advantage to decorrelate the responses (8, 9). That is, only those stimulus features that drive the population strongest could synchronize the response across neurons and thereby signal the presence of a particularly important stimulus.The role of synchronous activity in the cortex is widely discussed (6, 10-12), e.g., as a possible solution for the binding problem (for review see, e.g., refs. 13 and 14), as a separate information channel to relay visual information from thalamus to visual cortex (15), as a mechanism for gain control in visual cortex (16), or as a code for odor categories in zebrafish olfactory bulb (17).A synchrony code requires that asynchronously firing populations are synchronized or, vice versa, synchronization is escaped under certain conditions or by specific stimuli. In weakly electric fish, changes in the level of synchronization are considered an important cue for the detection of communication signals on the level of the receptor afferents (18-21) and subsequent processing in hind-and midbrain neurons (22,23). Middleton et al. (24) demonstrated that reading out population activity of electrosensory neurons with either integrators or coincidence detectors results in two distinct representations of sensory stimuli. Integrators encode low stimulus frequencies, approximately matching frequencies characteristic of prey detection and navigation. Coincidence detectors discard low-frequency information and encode predominantly higher frequencies matching the ones of c...