4.8 Article

Chronic reduction in inhibition reduces receptive field size in mouse auditory cortex

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1205909109

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [DC02260, MH077970]
  2. Coleman Memorial Fund
  3. Hearing Research, Inc.
  4. NIH Grant [GM007449, MH089920, MH049428, MH085946]
  5. Nina Ireland
  6. Weston Havens Foundation
  7. Staglin Family
  8. International Mental Health Research Organization
  9. Simons Foundation for Autism Research
  10. Steve and Connie Lieber/National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression Young Investigator Award
  11. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inhibitory interneurons regulate the responses of cortical circuits. In auditory cortical areas, inhibition from these neurons narrows spectral tuning and shapes response dynamics. Acute disruptions of inhibition expand spectral receptive fields. However, the effects of long-term perturbations of inhibitory circuitry on auditory cortical responses are unknown. We ablated similar to 30% of dendrite-targeting cortical inhibitory interneurons after the critical period by studying mice with a conditional deletion of Dlx1. Following the loss of interneurons, baseline firing rates rose and tone-evoked responses became less sparse in auditory cortex. However, contrary to acute blockades of inhibition, the sizes of spectral receptive fields were reduced, demonstrating both higher thresholds and narrower bandwidths. Furthermore, long-latency responses at the edge of the receptive field were absent. On the basis of changes in response dynamics, the mechanism for the reduction in receptive field size appears to be a compensatory loss of cortico-cortically (CC) driven responses. Our findings suggest chronic conditions that feature changes in inhibitory circuitry are not likely to be well modeled by acute network manipulations, and compensation may be a critical component of chronic neuronal conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据