Cited by 233Neural dynamics and brain functionNeuroscience and Music PerceptionNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Coordinated forms of noradrenergic plasticity in the locus coeruleus and primary auditory cortex

Open access
Martins, Ana Raquel O, Froemke, Robert C·2015·Nature Neuroscience

Abstract

The cerebral cortex is plastic and represents the world according to the significance of sensory stimuli. However, cortical networks are embodied in complex circuits, including neuromodulatory systems such as the noradrenergic locus coeruleus, providing information about internal state and behavioral relevance. Although norepinephrine is important for cortical plasticity, it is unknown how modulatory neurons themselves respond to changes of sensory input. We examined how locus coeruleus neurons are modified by experience and the consequences of locus coeruleus plasticity for cortical representations and sensory perception. We made whole-cell recordings from rat locus coeruleus and primary auditory cortex (A1), pairing sounds with locus coeruleus activation. Although initially unresponsive, locus coeruleus neurons developed and maintained auditory responses afterwards. Locus coeruleus plasticity induced changes in A1 responses lasting at least hours and improved auditory perception for days to weeks. Our results demonstrate that locus coeruleus is highly plastic, leading to substantial changes in regulation of brain state by norepinephrine.

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.4090

Cites

49 of 49 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?

  • Aberrant phasic NA may change the signal-to-noise ratio of cortical responses, broaden sensory tuning functions, and improve discrimination behaviour.

    “Aberrant phasic NA (c.f precision on prediction errors4,6) may alter the signal-to-noise ratio of cortical responses 41,42, broaden the tuning functions of sensory responses and, subsequently improve discrimination behaviour43.”

    From Adults with autism overestimate the volatility of the sensory environment (2017) · cites this paper as [43]

    The Results section (‘Locus coeruleus pairing improves auditory perception’; page not available) reports that auditory-cortical tuning initially broadened and discrimination later improved above baseline. But it says performance initially worsened during the broadening phase and improved after tuning width recovered; it does not show that broadening itself improved discrimination. The source studies locus coeruleus pairing, not aberrant phasic noradrenaline. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Stimulation of the locus coeruleus can markedly enhance auditory cortical responses and increase learning induced plasticity.

    “Stimulation of the locus coeruleus can markedly enhance auditory cortical responses and increase learning induced plasticity (Martins and Froemke, 2015).”

    From Waking state: rapid variations modulate neural and behavioral responses (2015) · cites this paper as Martins and Froemke, 2015

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [37]Aston-Jones G Rajkowski J Kubiak P Alexinsky T Locus coeruleus neurons in monkey are selectively activated by attended cues in a vigilance task J Neurosci 14 4467 4480 1994 8027789 PMC6577022

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martins, A. R. O., & Froemke, R. C.
Affiliations
  • Centro de Neurociências e Biologia Celular (PT)
  • New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Froemke, Robert C
Venue
Nature Neuroscience
Published
2015-08-24
Volume
18
Issue
10
Pages
1483-1492
ISSN
  • 1097-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1726
OpenAlex
W2342247067
Cited by
233
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 3
FWCI
11.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (K99DC009635, DC009635, R00DC009635, DC012557, R01DC012557)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
locus coeruleus, primary auditory cortex, norepinephrine, synaptic plasticity, auditory perception, neuromodulation
MeSH terms
Animals, Auditory Cortex, Female, Locus Coeruleus, Neuronal Plasticity, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Patch-Clamp Techniques, 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