Cited by 22Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchMemory and Neural MechanismsNeural dynamics and brain function

Pattern and not magnitude of neural activity determines dendritic spine stability in awake mice.

Open access
Wyatt, Ryan M, Tring, Elaine, Trachtenberg, Joshua T·2012·Nature Neuroscience

Abstract

The stability of dendritic spines in the neocortex is profoundly influenced by sensory experience, which determines the magnitude and pattern of neural firing. By optically manipulating the temporal structure of neural activity in vivo using channelrhodopsin-2 and repeatedly imaging dendritic spines along these stimulated neurons over a period of weeks, we show that the specific pattern, rather than the total amount of activity, determines spine stability in awake mice.

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/nn.3134

Cites

22 of 22 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?

  • The pattern of neural activity, rather than the magnitude, determines the stability of dendritic spines.

    “Recently, an elegant study combining optogenetic stimulation and in vivo imaging showed that it is the pattern of neural activity, rather than the magnitude, that determines the stability of dendritic spines (Wyatt et al., 2012).”

    From Spatiotemporal dynamics of dendritic spines in the living brain (2014) · cites this paper as Wyatt et al., 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
Wyatt, R. M., Tring, E., & Trachtenberg, J. T.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Trachtenberg, Joshua T
Venue
Nature Neuroscience
Published
2012-06-17
Volume
15
Issue
7
Pages
949-951
ISSN
  • 1097-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1726
OpenAlex
W1994082182
Cited by
22
References
22
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH077972, MH077972)
  • National Eye Institute (EY016052, R01EY016052, R01EY023871)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
neural activity patterns, spike timing, cortical pyramidal neurons, neocortex, sensory experience, channelrhodopsin-2, optogenetic stimulation, in vivo imaging, synaptic plasticity, awake mice
MeSH terms
Channelrhodopsins, Action Potentials, Amygdala, Animals, Mice, Transgenic, Neural Pathways, Sensory Receptor Cells, Wakefulness, Neocortex, Dendritic Spines, Mice

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