Cited by 99Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchAmino Acid Enzymes and MetabolismNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study

Glutamate toxicity in immature cortical neurons precedes development of glutamate receptor currents

Murphy, Timothy H., Baraban, Jay M.·1990·Developmental Brain Research

Abstract

Cationic fluxes resulting from glutamate receptor activity have recently been implicated in neurotoxicity. Immature cortical neurons are insensitive to the toxic effects of glutamate receptor stimulation. However, these neurons are killed by glutamate via a non-receptor-mediated mechanism thought to stem from glutamate's ability to inhibit cystine uptake. To examine the basis for their resistance to receptor-mediated toxicity, we have studied the development of glutamate receptor-mediated inward currents in cortical neurons in culture using the whole-cell voltage-clamp technique. We report that in immature cortical neurons (prepared from day-17 fetal brain and cultured for 1-3 days), N-methyl-D-aspartate, quisqualate, and glutamate are able to evoke only very small inward currents in a low percentage of neurons. After 7 days of culture, greater than 80% of neurons examined exhibited currents activated by these glutamate receptor agonists. Although most neurons expressed glutamate agonist-evoked currents after 7 days in culture, the amplitude of these currents was less than 10% of that observed after 15 days in culture. In contrast to currents activated by glutamate receptor agonists, those activated by gamma-aminobutyric acid reached maximal levels after only 2 days of culture. These results indicate that the delayed development of glutamate receptor-mediated currents accounts for the resistance of immature cortical neurons to glutamate receptor-mediated toxicity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0165-3806(90)90195-5

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Murphy, T. H., & Baraban, J. M.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Murphy, Timothy H.
Venue
Developmental Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1990-12
Volume
57
Issue
1
Pages
146-150
ISSN
0165-3806 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2064789374
Cited by
99
References
21
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Developmental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (5T32 MH15330-11, T32MH015330)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA.00266)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biochemistry › Amino Acid Enzymes and Metabolism
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
Keywords
glutamate excitotoxicity, NMDA receptor, kainate receptors, neurotoxicity, GABA-evoked currents, cystine uptake, neuronal maturation, excitatory amino acid toxicity
MeSH terms
Animals, Cerebral Cortex, Electrophysiology, Female, gamma-Aminobutyric Acid, Glutamates, Neurons, Pregnancy, Rats, Inbred Strains, N-Methylaspartate, Quisqualic Acid, Receptors, Glutamate, Receptors, Neurotransmitter, Glutamic Acid, Rats

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