Cited by 26

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Distribution of the SynDIG4/proline-rich transmembrane protein 1 in rat brain

Kirk, Lyndsey M., Ti, Shu W., Bishop, Hannah I., Orozco‐Llamas, Mayra, Pham, Michelle, Trimmer, James S., Díaz, Elva·2016·Journal of Comparative Neurology

Abstract

The modulation of AMPA receptor (AMPAR) content at synapses is thought to be an underlying molecular mechanism of memory and learning. AMPAR content at synapses is highly plastic and is regulated by numerous AMPAR accessory transmembrane proteins such as TARPs, cornichons, and CKAMPs. SynDIG (synapse differentiation‐induced gene) defines a family of four genes (SynDIG1–4) expressed in distinct and overlapping patterns in the brain. SynDIG1 was previously identified as a novel transmembrane AMPAR‐associated protein that regulates synaptic strength. The related protein SynDIG4 [also known as Prrt1 (proline‐rich transmembrane protein 1)] has recently been identified as a component of AMPAR complexes. In this study, we show that SynDIG1 and SynDIG4 have distinct yet overlapping patterns of expression in the central nervous system, with SynDIG4 having especially prominent expression in the hippocampus and particularly within CA1. In contrast to SynDIG1 and other traditional AMPAR auxiliary subunits, SynDIG4 is de‐enriched at the postsynaptic density and colocalizes with extrasynaptic GluA1 puncta in primary dissociated neuron culture. These results indicate that, although SynDIG4 shares sequence similarity with SynDIG1, it might act through a unique mechanism as an auxiliary factor for extrasynaptic GluA1‐containing AMPARs. J. Comp. Neurol. 524:2266–2280, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cne.23945

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0325-07.2007 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1113/jphysiol.2003.045575 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/0028-3908(96)00128-1 · DOI
  4. 10.1124/mi.10.5.5 · DOI
  5. Chen N, 2014, Interaction proteomics reveals brain region‐specific AMPA receptor complexes, J Proteome Res
  6. 10.1074/jbc.M803431200 · DOI
  7. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2010.07357.x · DOI
  8. 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)01016-4 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.neulet.2010.12.036 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/978-3-540-72843-6_17 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.tins.2007.11.010 · DOI
  12. 10.1073/pnas.0910338106 · DOI
  13. 10.1126/science.1152089 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.10.025 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4048-09.2009 · DOI
  16. 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.04.007 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1006/jmbi.2001.5008 · DOI
  18. 10.1074/mcp.M400045-MCP200 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.12.021 · DOI
  20. 10.1096/fasebj.14.2.231 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2013.03.016 · DOI
  22. 10.1371/journal.pone.0066171 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.02.027 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.112830 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1038/nn1678 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2728-06.2006 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1126/science.1167852 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.03.034 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.08.044 · DOI
  30. 10.1016/j.brainres.2011.11.029 · DOI
  31. 10.1016/j.celrep.2012.05.004 · DOI · Paper page
  32. 10.1073/pnas.1011706107 · DOI
  33. 10.1002/pro.256 · DOI
  34. 10.1016/j.celrep.2012.02.004 · DOI
  35. 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.12.042 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/0092-8674(85)90218-1 · DOI
  37. 10.1126/science.1184178 · DOI
  38. 10.1126/science.284.5421.1805 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kirk, L. M., Ti, S. W., Bishop, H. I., Orozco‐Llamas, M., Pham, M., Trimmer, J. S., & Díaz, E.
Affiliations
  • Department of Pharmacology University of California Davis School of Medicine Davis California 95616
  • Department of Neurobiology Physiology and Behavior, University of California Davis California 95616
Venue
Journal of Comparative Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-12-29
Volume
524
Issue
11
Pages
2266-2280
ISSN
  • 0021-9967
  • 1096-9861
Cited by
26
References
4
Language
en
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health Director's New Innovator Award Program (DP2 OD006479-01)
  • National Science Foundation (1322302)
  • National Institutes of Health (#R01 NS042225, T32 GM007377)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review