Cited by 600Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeural dynamics and brain functionMemory and Neural Mechanisms

A synaptic memory trace for cortical receptive field plasticity

Froemke, Robert C., Merzenich, Michael M., Schreiner, Christoph E.·2007·Nature

Abstract

Receptive fields of sensory cortical neurons are plastic, changing in response to alterations of neural activity or sensory experience. In this way, cortical representations of the sensory environment can incorporate new information about the world, depending on the relevance or value of particular stimuli. Neuromodulation is required for cortical plasticity, but it is uncertain how subcortical neuromodulatory systems, such as the cholinergic nucleus basalis, interact with and refine cortical circuits. Here we determine the dynamics of synaptic receptive field plasticity in the adult primary auditory cortex (also known as AI) using in vivo whole-cell recording. Pairing sensory stimulation with nucleus basalis activation shifted the preferred stimuli of cortical neurons by inducing a rapid reduction of synaptic inhibition within seconds, which was followed by a large increase in excitation, both specific to the paired stimulus. Although nucleus basalis was stimulated only for a few minutes, reorganization of synaptic tuning curves progressed for hours thereafter: inhibition slowly increased in an activity-dependent manner to rebalance the persistent enhancement of excitation, leading to a retuned receptive field with new preference for the paired stimulus. This restricted period of disinhibition may be a fundamental mechanism for receptive field plasticity, and could serve as a memory trace for stimuli or episodes that have acquired new behavioural significance.

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 · 10.1038/nature06289

Cites

33 of 33 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?

  • In the auditory cortex, pairing sensory stimulation with stimulation of the basal forebrain results in a long-term reorganization of cortical receptive field structure, including a persistent shift in the receptive field towards the paired stimulus.

    “In the auditory cortex, pairing sensory stimulation with stimulation of the basal forebrain results in a long-term reorganization of cortical receptive field structure, including a persistent shift in the receptive field towards the paired stimulus (Froemke et al., 2007).”
  • ACh modulates cortical circuits over longer time scales by influencing the plasticity of cortical circuits.

    “ACh also modulates cortical circuits over longer time scales by influencing the plasticity of cortical circuits.”
  • Collectively, these changes could increase inhibition in association cortex and mediate transient enhancement and developmental reduction of plasticity in a manner similar to sensory cortex.

    “Collectively, these changes could increase inhibition in association cortex and mediate transient enhancement and developmental reduction of plasticity (Dorrn et al., 2010; Froemke et al., 2007; Gandhi et al., 2008; Hensch, 2005; Southwell et al., 2010) in a manner similar to sensory cortex (Levelt and Hubener, 2012) .”

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
Froemke, R. C., Merzenich, M. M., & Schreiner, C. E.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Froemke, Robert C.
Venue
Nature
Published
2007-11-15
Volume
450
Issue
7168
Pages
425-429
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2151934707
Cited by
600
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 22
FWCI
9.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC002260)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
receptive field plasticity, primary auditory cortex, nucleus basalis of Meynert, cholinergic modulation, synaptic inhibition, disinhibition, synaptic excitation, memory traces, sensory learning, activity-dependent plasticity
MeSH terms
Animals, Auditory Cortex, Female, Memory, Neuronal Plasticity, Neurons, Afferent, Synapses, Time Factors, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Excitatory Postsynaptic Potentials, 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