Cited by 52Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchIon channel regulation and functionNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Muscarinic presynaptic inhibition of neostriatal glutamatergic afferents is mediated by Q-type Ca2+ channels

Barral, J, Galarraga, E, Bargas, J·1999·Brain Research Bulletin

Abstract

Cholinergic presynaptic inhibition was investigated on neostriatal glutamatergic transmission. Paired pulse facilitation (PPF) of orthodromic population spikes (PS) were used to construct a concentration-response relationship for muscarine on presynaptic inhibition. Muscarine had an effect proportional to its extracellular concentration with an EC50 (mean +/- standard estimation error) of: 2.5 +/- 1.5 nM, and a maximal effect (saturation) of 245 +/- 16%. Several peptidic toxins against some voltage-gated Ca2+-channels increased PPF indicating that the Ca2+-channels they block participate in transmitter release. However, neither 1 microM omega-conotoxin GVIA, a specific blocker of N-type Ca2+-channels, nor 10-30 nM omega-agatoxinTK, a selective blocker of P-type Ca2+-channels, were able to occlude muscarine's effect on presynaptic inhibition. Nevertheless, 100-400 nM omega-agatoxinTK occluded muscarine's action on PPF in a dose-dependent manner. These results are consistent with Q-type Ca2+-channels mediating muscarinic presynaptic inhibition of neostriatal afferents.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0361-9230(99)00061-1

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 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?

  • Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors reduce the probability of glutamate release from excitatory afferents to the striatum, negatively regulating the ability of these inputs to drive striatal activity.

    “In contrast, mAChRs reduce the probability of glutamate release from excitatory afferents to the striatum, negatively regulating the ability of these inputs to drive striatal activity (Barral et al., 1999; Higley et al., 2009; Pakhotin and Bracci, 2007).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barral, J., Galarraga, E., & Bargas, J.
Affiliations
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
Corresponding author
Barral, J
Venue
Brain Research Bulletin
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-07
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
285-289
ISSN
0361-9230 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2053168522
Cited by
52
References
25
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain Research Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Ion channel regulation and function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
neostriatum, glutamatergic afferents, Q-type calcium channels, paired-pulse facilitation, muscarine, omega-conotoxin GVIA, N-type calcium channels, P-type calcium channels, cholinergic modulation, neurotransmitter release
MeSH terms
Afferent Pathways, Animals, Calcium Channel Blockers, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Evoked Potentials, Muscarine, Neural Inhibition, Peptides, Spider Venoms, Calcium Channels, Neostriatum, Rats, Wistar, Receptors, Presynaptic, Presynaptic Terminals, Glutamic Acid, Muscarinic Agonists, omega-Conotoxin GVIA, omega-Agatoxin IVA, 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