Cited by 1,715Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsNeural dynamics and brain function

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Synaptic scaling mediated by glial TNF-α

Abstract

Two general forms of synaptic plasticity that operate on different timescales are thought to contribute to the activity-dependent refinement of neural circuitry during development: (1) long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD), which involve rapid adjustments in the strengths of individual synapses in response to specific patterns of correlated synaptic activity, and (2) homeostatic synaptic scaling, which entails uniform adjustments in the strength of all synapses on a cell in response to prolonged changes in the cell's electrical activity. Without homeostatic synaptic scaling, neural networks can become unstable and perform suboptimally. Although much is known about the mechanisms underlying LTP and LTD, little is known about the mechanisms responsible for synaptic scaling except that such scaling is due, at least in part, to alterations in receptor content at synapses. Here we show that synaptic scaling in response to prolonged blockade of activity is mediated by the pro-inflammatory cytokine tumour-necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha). Using mixtures of wild-type and TNF-alpha-deficient neurons and glia, we also show that glia are the source of the TNF-alpha that is required for this form of synaptic scaling. We suggest that by modulating TNF-alpha levels, glia actively participate in the homeostatic activity-dependent regulation of synaptic connectivity.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature04671

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 31 references

1 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 1,004

Metadata

Authors
Stellwagen, D., & Malenka, R. C.
Affiliations
Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Malenka, Robert C.
Venue
Nature
Published
2006-04-01
Volume
440
Issue
7087
Pages
1054-1059
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W1542136448
Cited by
1,715
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 73 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 102 · 2021: 102 · 2020: 117 · 2019: 80 · 2018: 87 · 2017: 94 · 2016: 80 · 2015: 92 · 2014: 92 · 2013: 104 · 2012: 103
FWCI
27.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
synaptic scaling, homeostatic plasticity, TNF-α, neuron-glia interactions, long-term potentiation, long-term depression, neural network stability
MeSH terms
Animals, Hippocampus, Nerve Net, Neuroglia, Neurons, Synapses, Tetrodotoxin, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha, Signal Transduction, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Long-Term Potentiation, Receptors, AMPA, Receptors, Tumor Necrosis Factor, Excitatory Postsynaptic Potentials, Long-Term Synaptic Depression, Mice, 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