Two-pronged control of the dorsal raphe by the VTA
Open accessAbstract
In this issue of Neuron, Li et al. (2019) distinguish two separable GABAergic projections from the ventral tegmental area (VTA) to the dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN), with differential μ-opioid receptor regulation, each targeting different postsynaptic neurons and promoting opposing behavioral states.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 10 · Cited by 4
- Authors
- Kauer, J. A., & Polter, A. M.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- George Washington University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kauer, Julie A.
- Venue
- Neuron
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-02
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 553-555
- ISSN
- 0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2916104684
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 0.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Neuron (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
- Keywords
- ventral tegmental area, dorsal raphe nucleus, GABAergic projections, mu-opioid receptor, postsynaptic neurons, behavioral state, dopaminergic modulation, serotonergic neurons
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Opioid-Related Disorders, Neurons, Ventral Tegmental Area, Dorsal Raphe Nucleus
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
