The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intercellular communication in the brain: Wiring versus volume transmission
Open accessAbstract
During the past two decades several revisions of the concepts underlying interneuronal communication in the central nervous system have been advanced. We propose here to classify communicational phenomena between cells of the central neural tissue under two general frames: "wiring" and "volume" transmission. "Wiring" transmission is defined as intercellular communication occurring through a well-defined connecting structure. Thus, wiring transmission is characterized by the presence of physically identifiable communication channels within the neuronal and/or glial cell network. It includes synaptic transmission but also other types of intercellular communication through a connecting structure (e.g., gap junctions). "Volume" transmission is characterized by signal diffusion in a three-dimensional fashion within the brain extracellular fluid. Thus, multiple, structurally often not well characterized extracellular pathways connect intercommunicating cells. Volume transmission includes short- (but larger than synaptic cleft, i.e. about 20 nm) and long-distance diffusion of signals through the extracellular and cerebrospinal fluid. It must be underlined that the definitions of wiring and volume transmission focus on the modality of transmission and are neutral with respect to the source and target of the transmission, as well as type of informational substance transmitted. Therefore, any cell present in the neural tissue (neurons, astroglia, microglia, ependyma, tanycytes, etc.) can be a source or a target of wiring and volume transmission. In this paper we discuss the basic definitions and some distinctive characteristics of the two types of transmission. In addition, we review the evidence for different types of intercellular communication besides synaptic transmission in the central nervous system during phylogeny, and in vertebrates in physiological and pathological conditions.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Schell, M. J., Molliver, M. E., & Snyder, S. H. (1995) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.92.9.3948 · Cited by 832
Rennels, M. L., Gregory, T. F., Blaumanis, O. R., Fujimoto, K., & Grady, P. A. (1985) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/0006-8993(85)91383-6 · Cited by 752
Herkenham, M. (1987) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/0306-4522(87)90268-5 · Cited by 520
Molecular mechanisms of sleep‐wake regulation: roles of prostaglandins D 2 and E 2
Hayaishi, O. (1991) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fasebj.5.11.1907936 · Cited by 235
Cited by
What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI
Logothetis, N. K. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06976 · Cited by 3,612
Nichols, D. E. (2016) · Pharmacological Reviews · doi:10.1124/pr.115.011478 · Cited by 1,762
Presynaptic nicotinic ACh receptors
Wonnacott, S. (1997) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/s0166-2236(96)10073-4 · Cited by 1,308
The neural circuit of orexin (hypocretin): maintaining sleep and wakefulness
Sakurai, T. (2007) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2092 · Cited by 1,276
Nichols, D. E. (2004) · Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2003.11.002 · Cited by 1,211
Metadata
- Authors
- Agnati, L. F., Zoli, M., Strömberg, I., & Fuxe, K.
- Venue
- Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1995-12
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 711-726
- ISSN
- 0306-4522 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2075952655
- Cited by
- 568
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 7.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Intercellular communication in the brain: Wiring versus volume transmission. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0306-4522(95)00308-6
- The paper
- Agnati, L. F., Zoli, M., Strömberg, I., & Fuxe, K. (1995). Intercellular communication in the brain: Wiring versus volume transmission. Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4522(95)00308-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
