Cited by 76Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Effects of monocular deprivation on geniculocortical synapses in the cat

Tieman, Suzannah Bliss·1984·Journal of Comparative Neurology

Abstract

In monocularly deprived (MD) cats, many cells in the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) but few cells in the visual cortex respond to input from the deprived eye, suggesting that the connections to visual cortex from the deprived geniculate laminae may have been disrupted. I have examined these connections in MD cats by using electron microscopic autoradiography of visual cortex after injections of tritiated lysine into single laminae of LGN. After injections into either deprived or experienced laminae, there was label over terminals that contained mitochondria and round synaptic vesicles and that made asymmetric contacts with dendritic profiles. However, the terminals of deprived afferents differed from those of experienced afferents. They were 25% smaller, contained 33% fewer mitochondria, were more likely to make synapses that were presynaptically convex (and thus, perhaps, immature), and synapsed onto smaller spines. These morphological changes were greater for afferents to upper layer IV than for afferents to lower layer IV. The geniculocortical synapses from deprived laminae were also reduced in number. To correct for variations in injection size and for a probable reduction in protein synthesis by cells in the deprived laminae, I computed the ratio of labeled synaptic terminals to labeled myelinated axons. Injections into the deprived laminae labeled 43% fewer synaptic terminals per labeled myelinated axon than did injections into the experienced lamina. The finding that…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cne.902220203

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Sensory deprivation or TTX reduces mitochondria in presynaptic terminals known to undergo subsequent elimination.

    “Previous work has suggested that sensory deprivation or pharmacological blockade of neuronal activity (i.e., TTX) results in reduced mitochondria in presynaptic terminals known to undergo subsequent elimination (Hevner and Wong-Riley, 1993; Tieman, 1984).”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 42 · Cited by 76

Authors
Tieman, S. B.
Affiliations
State University of New York (US)
Corresponding author
Tieman, Suzannah Bliss
Venue
Journal of Comparative Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1984-01-10
Volume
222
Issue
2
Pages
166-176
ISSN
  • 0021-9967 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9861
OpenAlex
W2172165663
Cited by
76
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
6.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Comparative Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Keywords
monocular deprivation, lateral geniculate nucleus, visual cortex, mitochondria, dendritic spines, layer 4
MeSH terms
Animals, Cats, Geniculate Bodies, Microscopy, Electron, Retina, Sensory Deprivation, Synapses, Vision, Ocular, Visual Cortex, Visual Pathways

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