Cited by 413Genetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

Increased excitation-inhibition ratio stabilizes synapse and circuit excitability in four autism mouse models

Open access
Antoine, Michelle W., Langberg, Tomer, Schnepel, Philipp, Feldman, Daniel E.·2019·Neuron

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Distinct genetic forms of autism are hypothesized to share a common increase in excitation-inhibition (E-I) ratio in cerebral cortex, causing hyperexcitability and excess spiking. We provide a systematic test of this hypothesis across 4 mouse models (Fmr1-/y, Cntnap2-/-, 16p11.2 del/+, Tsc2+/-), focusing on somatosensory cortex. All autism mutants showed reduced feedforward inhibition in layer 2/3 coupled with more modest, variable reduction in feedforward excitation, driving a common increase in E-I conductance ratio. Despite this, feedforward spiking, synaptic depolarization, and spontaneous spiking were largely normal. Modeling revealed that E and I conductance changes in each mutant were quantitatively matched to yield stable, not increased, synaptic depolarization for cells near spike threshold. Correspondingly, whisker-evoked spiking was not increased in vivo despite detectably reduced inhibition. Thus, elevated E-I ratio is a common circuit phenotype but appears to reflect homeostatic stabilization of synaptic drive rather than driving network hyperexcitability in autism.

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 · 10.1016/j.neuron.2018.12.026

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • 16p11.2+/− mice (Mills) display deficient NMDA-receptor-mediated glutamatergic transmission and reduced action potential firing frequency in mPFC pyramidal neurons, along with increased excitation-inhibition ratio in somatosensory cortex.

    “The 16p11.2+/− mice (Mills) display deficient NMDA-receptor-mediated glutamatergic transmission and reduced frequency of action potential firing in medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) pyramidal neurons [62], along with increased excitation-inhibition (E-I) ratio in somatosensory cortex [75].”
  • In four etiologically distinct ASD mouse models, altered E/I balance was observed in the somatosensory cortex without corresponding changes in overall circuit excitability, suggesting altered E/I balance may be homeostatic compensation and not a primary mechanism mediating social impairments.

    “in four etiologically distinct ASD mouse models, altered E/I balance was observed in the somatosensory cortex, without any corresponding changes in overall circuit excitability, suggesting altered E/I balance may be homeostatic compensation and not a primary mechanism mediating social impairments [131].”

    From Neural circuits regulating prosocial behaviors (2023) · cites this paper as [131]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Antoine, M. W., Langberg, T., Schnepel, P., & Feldman, D. E.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
Corresponding author
  • Antoine, Michelle W.
  • Feldman, Daniel E.
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
101
Issue
4
Pages
648-661.e4
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2950040155
Cited by
413
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 4
FWCI
30.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Simons Foundation (342096)
  • NIH (R01 NS105333)
  • Miller Institute for Basic Research
  • Ford Foundation
  • UC President’s Postdoctoral Fellowship Program
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, feedforward inhibition, somatosensory cortex, FMR1 gene, CNTNAP2, 16p11.2 deletion, TSC2, mouse models of autism, spontaneous spiking
MeSH terms
Tuberous Sclerosis Complex 2 Protein, Animals, Autistic Disorder, Chromosomes, Human, Pair 16, Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory, Humans, Male, Membrane Proteins, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Nerve Tissue Proteins, Somatosensory Cortex, Excitatory Postsynaptic Potentials, Mice, Fragile X Messenger Ribonucleoprotein 1, Inhibitory Postsynaptic Potentials

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