CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 6Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders

Synaptic proteome diversity is shaped by the levels of glutamate receptors and their regulatory proteins

Open access
Reig-Viader, Rita, del Castillo-Berges, Diego, Burgas-Pau, Albert, Arco-Alonso, Daniel, Zerpa-Rios, Oriana, Ramos-Vicente, David, Picañol, Javier, Castellanos, Aida +4 more·2025·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-025-65490-9PMC PMC12647736
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract Synapses formed by equivalent pairs of pre- and postsynaptic neurons have similar electrophysiological characteristics, belonging to the same type. However, these are generally confined to microscopic brain regions, precluding their proteomic analysis. This fact has greatly limited our ability to investigate the molecular basis of synaptic physiology. We introduce a procedure to characterise the synaptic proteome of microscopic brain regions and explore the molecular diversity among the synapses forming the trisynaptic circuit in the hippocampus. While we observe a remarkable proteomic diversity among these synapses, we also report that proteins involved in the regulation of the function of glutamate receptors are differentially expressed in all of them. Moreover, neuron-specific gene expression programs would contribute to their regulation. Here, we introduce a combined proteomics and transcriptomics analysis uncovering a previously unrecognised neuron-specific control of synaptic proteome diversity, directed towards the regulation of glutamate receptors and their regulatory proteins.

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/s41467-025-65490-9

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • Synaptic proteome diversity is specifically shaped by the levels of glutamate receptors and their associated regulatory proteins, allowing for a molecular classification that extends beyond connectivity.

    “Recently, it has been shown that synaptic proteome diversity is specifically shaped by the levels of glutamate receptors and their associated regulatory proteins, allowing for a molecular classification that extends beyond connectivity [5].”

    From Molecular Physiology of the Neuronal Synapse (2026) · cites this paper as [5]

    The Discussion reports that glutamate receptors and proteins controlling their function are common drivers of proteomic variability among synapses in the mouse hippocampal trisynaptic circuit. But the Introduction defines synaptic types in this study by their pre- and postsynaptic neuronal pair; it does not establish a molecular classification of synapses beyond connectivity. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Post-translational modifications such as phosphorylation, palmitoylation, and glycosylation further diversify the proteome by altering protein function, stability, localization, and interaction partners.

    “Post-translational modifications (PTMs), such as phosphorylation, palmitoylation, and glycosylation, further diversify the proteome by altering protein function, stability, localization, and interaction partners [5,87].”

    From Molecular Physiology of the Neuronal Synapse (2026) · cites this paper as [5]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) attributes synaptic proteome diversity chiefly to differences in glutamate-receptor-related proteins and neuron-specific gene expression, not to post-translational modifications. Searches for PTMs, phosphorylation, palmitoylation, and glycosylation found phosphorylation and palmitoylation only in a cited reference’s title; no passage states the claimed effects on proteome diversity, stability, localization, or interaction partners. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 91

  1. [1]Li, K. W., Gonzalez-Lozano, M. A., Koopmans, F. & Smit, A. B. Recent developments in data independent acquisition (dia) mass spectrometry: application of quantitative analysis of the brain proteome. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 13, 564446 (2020). 33424549 PMC7793698 · DOI
  2. [2]Koopmans, F. et al. SynGO: an evidence-based, expert-curated knowledge base for the synapse. Neuron 103, 217–234.e4 (2019). 31171447 PMC6764089 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [3]Bayés, A. & Grant, S. G. N. Neuroproteomics: understanding the molecular organization and complexity of the brain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10, 635–646 (2009). 19693028 · DOI
  4. [4]O’Rourke, N. A., Weiler, N. C., Micheva, K. D. & Smith, S. J. Deep molecular diversity of mammalian synapses: why it matters and how to measure it. Nat. Rev. Neurosci.10.1038/nrn3170 (2012). PMC3670986 22573027 · DOI · Paper page
  5. [5]Dieterich, D. C. & Kreutz, M. R. Proteomics of the Synapse-A Quantitative Approach to Neuronal Plasticity. Mol. Cell. Proteom.: MCP 15, 368–381 (2015). 26307175 PMC4739661 · DOI
  6. [6]Bayés, A. et al. Comparative study of human and mouse postsynaptic proteomes finds high compositional conservation and abundance differences for key synaptic proteins. PLoS ONE 7, e46683 (2012). 23071613 PMC3465276 · DOI · Paper page
  7. [7]Sorokina, O. et al. A unified resource and configurable model of the synapse proteome and its role in disease. Sci. Rep.-uk 11, 9967 (2021). PMC8113277 33976238 · DOI
  8. [8]Distler, U. et al. In-depth protein profiling of the postsynaptic density from mouse hippocampus using data-independent acquisition proteomics. Proteomics 14, 2607–2613 (2014). 25211037 · DOI
  9. [9]Bayés, A. et al. Characterization of the proteome, diseases and evolution of the human postsynaptic density. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 19–21 (2011). 21170055 PMC3040565 · DOI · Paper page
  10. [10]Roy, M. et al. Proteomic analysis of postsynaptic proteins in regions of the human neocortex. Nat. Neurosci. 21, 130–138 (2018). 29203896 · DOI
  11. [11]Trinidad, J. C., Thalhammer, A., Burlingame, A. L. & Schoepfer, R. Activity-dependent protein dynamics define interconnected cores of co-regulated postsynaptic proteins. Molecular & cellular proteomics: MCP10.1074/mcp.m112.019976 (2012). PMC3536907 23035237
  12. [12]Malenka, R. C. & Bear, M. F. LTP and LTD: an embarrassment of riches. Neuron 44, 5–21 (2004). 15450156 · DOI · Paper page
  13. [13]Zhu, F. et al. Architecture of the Mouse Brain Synaptome. Neuron 99, 781–799.e10 (2018). 30078578 PMC6117470 · DOI
  14. [14]Cizeron, M. et al. A brain-wide atlas of synapses across the mouse lifespan. Science10.1126/science.aba3163 (2020). PMC7115813 32527927
  15. [15]Huganir, R. L. & Nicoll, R. A. AMPARs and Synaptic Plasticity: The Last 25 Years. Neuron 80, 704–717 (2013). 24183021 PMC4195488 · DOI · Paper page
  16. [16]Citri, A. & Malenka, R. C. Synaptic plasticity: multiple forms, functions, and mechanisms. Neuropsychopharmacology 33, 18–41 (2008). 17728696 · DOI · Paper page
  17. [17]Nicoll, R. A. & Schmitz, D. Synaptic plasticity at hippocampal mossy fibre synapses. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 6, 863–876 (2005). 16261180 · DOI · Paper page
  18. [18]Moradi, K. & Ascoli, G. A. A comprehensive knowledge base of synaptic electrophysiology in the rodent hippocampal formation. Hippocampus 30, 314–331 (2020). 31472001 PMC7875289 · DOI
  19. [19]Biesemann, C. et al. Proteomic screening of glutamatergic mouse brain synaptosomes isolated by fluorescence activated sorting. EMBO J. 33, 157–170 (2014). 24413018 PMC3989609 · DOI · Paper page
  20. [20]Oostrum, M. et al. The proteomic landscape of synaptic diversity across brain regions and cell types. bioRxiv 2023.01.27.525780 10.1101/2023.01.27.525780 (2023). PMC10686415 37918396 · DOI
  21. [21]Apóstolo, N. et al. Synapse type-specific proteomic dissection identifies IgSF8 as a hippocampal CA3 microcircuit organizer. Nat. Commun. 11, 5171 (2020). 33057002 PMC7560607 · DOI
  22. [22]Luquet, E., Biesemann, C., Munier, A. & Herzog, E. Purification of Synaptosome Populations Using Fluorescence-Activated Synaptosome Sorting. in 1538 121–134 (Springer New York, 2016). 27943188
  23. [23]Paget-Blanc, V. et al. A synaptomic analysis reveals dopamine hub synapses in the mouse striatum. Nat. Commun. 13, 3102 (2022). 35660742 PMC9166739 · DOI
  24. [24]Uezu, A. et al. Identification of an elaborate complex mediating postsynaptic inhibition. Science 353, 1123–1129 (2016). 27609886 PMC5432043 · DOI · Paper page
  25. [25]Takano, T. & Soderling, S. H. Tripartite synaptomics: Cell-surface proximity labeling in vivo. Neurosci. Res. 173, 14–21 (2021). 34019951 PMC8602446 · DOI
  26. [26]Cijsouw, T. et al. Mapping the Proteome of the Synaptic Cleft through Proximity Labeling Reveals New Cleft Proteins. Proteomes 6, 48 (2018). 30487426 PMC6313906 · DOI
  27. [27]Zhu, F. et al. Synapse molecular complexity and the plasticity behaviour problem. Brain Neurosci. Adv. 99, 239821281881068 (2018). PMC7058196 32166154
  28. [28]Amaral, D. & Lavenex, P. Hippocampal neuroanatomy. in The Hippocampus Book (eds. Andersen, P., Morris, R., Amaral, D., Bliss, T. & O’Keffe, J.) 37–114 (Oxford University Press, 2007).
  29. [30]Megías, M., Emri, Z., Freund, T. F. & Gulyás, A. I. Total number and distribution of inhibitory and excitatory synapses on hippocampal CA1 pyramidal cells. Neuroscience 102, 527–540 (2001). 11226691 · DOI · Paper page
  30. [31]Montero-Crespo, M. et al. Three-dimensional synaptic organization of the human hippocampal CA1 field. eLife 9, e57013 (2020). 32690133 PMC7375818 · DOI · Paper page
  31. [32]Amaral, D. G. & Witter, M. P. The three-dimensional organization of the hippocampal formation: A review of anatomical data. Neuroscience 31, 571–591 (1989). 2687721 · DOI · Paper page
  32. [33]Amaral, D. G., Ishizuka, N. & Claiborne, B. Chapter 1 Chapter Neurons, numbers and the hippocampal network. Prog. Brain Res. 83, 1–11 (1990). 2203093 · DOI
  33. [35]Gonzales, R. B., Galvan, C. J. D., Rangel, Y. M. & Claiborne, B. J. Distribution of thorny excrescences on CA3 pyramidal neurons in the rat hippocampus. J. Comp. Neurol. 430, 357–368 (2001). 11169473 · DOI
  34. [36]Henze, D. A., Urban, N. N. & Barrionuevo, G. The multifarious hippocampal mossy fiber pathway: a review. Neuroscience 98, 407–427 (2000). 10869836 · DOI
  35. [37]Marneffe, C., Moreira-de-Sá, A., Lecomte, S., Erhardt, A. & Mulle, C. Short term plasticity at hippocampal mossy fiber synapses. Neuroscience10.1016/j.neuroscience.2024.09.044 (2024). 39332701
  36. [38]Nafstad, P. H. J. An electron microscope study on the termination of the perforant path fibres in the hippocampus and the fascia dentata. Z. Für Zellforsch. Und Mikroskopische Anat. 76, 532–542 (1967). 5585500 · DOI
  37. [40]Reig-Viader, R. & Bayés, A. Quantitative In-Depth Profiling of the Postsynaptic Density Proteome to Understand the Molecular Mechanisms Governing Synaptic Physiology and Pathology. in 127 255–280 (Springer New York, 2017).
  38. [41]Goeminne, L. J. E., Gevaert, K. & Clement, L. Experimental design and data-analysis in label-free quantitative LC/MS proteomics: A tutorial with MSqRob. J. Proteom. 171, 23–36 (2018). 28391044 · DOI
  39. [42]Goeminne, L. J. E., Sticker, A., Martens, L., Gevaert, K. & Clement, L. MSqRob takes the missing hurdle: uniting intensity- and count-based proteomics. Anal. Chem. 92, 6278–6287 (2020). 32227882 · DOI
  40. [43]Hansen, K. B. et al. Structure, function, and pharmacology of glutamate receptor ion channels. Pharm. Rev. 73, 298–487 (2021). 34753794 PMC8626789 · DOI · Paper page
  41. [44]Mosbacher, J. et al. A molecular determinant for submillisecond desensitization in glutamate receptors. Science 266, 1059–1062 (1994). 7973663 · DOI
  42. [45]Partin, K. M., Bowie, D. & Mayer, M. L. Structural determinants of allosteric regulation in alternatively spliced AMPA receptors. Neuron 14, 833–843 (1995). 7718245 · DOI
  43. [46]Schwenk, J. et al. Functional proteomics identify cornichon proteins as auxiliary subunits of AMPA receptors. Science 323, 1313–1319 (2009). 19265014 · DOI
  44. [47]Coombs, I. D. et al. Cornichons modify channel properties of recombinant and glial AMPA receptors. J. Neurosci. 32, 9796–9804 (2012). 22815494 PMC3428874 · DOI
  45. [48]Lein, E. S. et al. Genome-wide atlas of gene expression in the adult mouse brain. Nature 445, 168–176 (2007). 17151600 · DOI · Paper page
  46. [50]Fabregat, A. et al. The reactome pathway knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, D649–D655 (2018). 29145629 PMC5753187 · DOI
  47. [51]Kanehisa, M., Sato, Y., Kawashima, M., Furumichi, M. & Tanabe, M. KEGG as a reference resource for gene and protein annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, D457–D462 (2016). 26476454 PMC4702792 · DOI · Paper page
  48. [52]Agrawal, A. et al. WikiPathways 2024: next generation pathway database. Nucleic Acids Res 52, D679–D689 (2023). PMC10767877 37941138 · DOI
  49. [53]Ashburner, M. et al. Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25, 25–29 (2000). 10802651 PMC3037419 · DOI · Paper page
  50. [54]Aleksander, S. A. et al. The Gene Ontology knowledgebase in 2023. GENETICS 224, iyad031 (2023). 36866529 PMC10158837 · DOI
  51. [55]Ulgen, E., Ozisik, O. & Sezerman, O. U. pathfindR: An R package for comprehensive identification of enriched pathways in omics data through active subnetworks. Front. Genet. 10, 858 (2019). 31608109 PMC6773876 · DOI
  52. [56]Chicco, D. & Agapito, G. Nine quick tips for pathway enrichment analysis. PLoS Comput. Biol. 18, e1010348 (2022). 35951505 PMC9371296 · DOI
  53. [57]Mubeen, S., Kodamullil, A. T., Hofmann-Apitius, M. & Domingo-Fernández, D. On the influence of several factors on pathway enrichment analysis. Brief. Bioinform. 23, bbac143 (2022). 35453140 PMC9116215 · DOI
  54. [58]Hanley, J. G. The regulation of AMPA receptor endocytosis by dynamic protein-protein interactions. Front Cell Neurosci. 12, 362 (2018). 30364226 PMC6193100 · DOI
  55. [60]Yang, Y. & Liu, J.-J. Structural LTP: Signal transduction, actin cytoskeleton reorganization, and membrane remodeling of dendritic spines. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 74, 102534 (2022). 35398661 · DOI
  56. [61]Narvaes, R. F. & Furini, C. R. G. Role of Wnt signaling in synaptic plasticity and memory. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 187, 107558 (2022). 34808336 · DOI
  57. [62]McLeod, F. et al. Wnt signaling mediates LTP-dependent spine plasticity and ampar localization through Frizzled-7 receptors. Cell Rep. 23, 1060–1071 (2018). 29694885 PMC5946458 · DOI
  58. [63]Chen, Z. et al. Autism-Risk Gene necab2 regulates psychomotor and social behavior as a neuronal modulator of mglur1 signaling. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 15, 901682 (2022). 35909444 PMC9326220 · DOI
  59. [64]Nicodemo, A. A. et al. Pyk2 uncouples metabotropic glutamate receptor G protein signaling but facilitates ERK1/2 activation. Mol. Brain 3, 4 (2010). 20180987 PMC2829546 · DOI
  60. [65]Klaassen, R. V. et al. Shisa6 traps AMPA receptors at postsynaptic sites and prevents their desensitization during synaptic activity. Nat. Commun. 7, 10682 (2016). 26931375 PMC4778035 · DOI
  61. [66]Ruhl, D. A. et al. Synaptotagmin 17 controls neurite outgrowth and synaptic physiology via distinct cellular pathways. Nat. Commun. 10, 3532 (2019). 31387992 PMC6684635 · DOI
  62. [67]Jurado, S. et al. LTP requires a unique postsynaptic SNARE fusion machinery. Neuron 77, 542–558 (2013). 23395379 PMC3569727 · DOI · Paper page
  63. [68]Yuan, A. et al. Neurofilament subunits are integral components of synapses and modulate neurotransmission and behavior in vivo. Mol. Psychiatr. 20, 986–994 (2015). PMC4514553 25869803 · DOI
  64. [69]Yuan, A. et al. Neurofilament light interaction with GluN1 modulates neurotransmission and schizophrenia-associated behaviors. Transl. Psychiatry 8, 167 (2018). 30143609 PMC6109052 · DOI
  65. [70]Kanai, Y., Dohmae, N. & Hirokawa, N. Kinesin transports RNA isolation and characterization of an RNA-Transporting Granule. Neuron 43, 513–525 (2004). 15312650 · DOI
  66. [71]Monday, H. R., Kharod, S. C., Yoon, Y. J., Singer, R. H. & Castillo, P. E. Presynaptic FMRP and local protein synthesis support structural and functional plasticity of glutamatergic axon terminals. Neuron 110, 2588–2606.e6 (2022). 35728596 PMC9391299 · DOI
  67. [72]Park, H. et al. Splice-dependent trans-synaptic PTPδ–IL1RAPL1 interaction regulates synapse formation and non-REM sleep. EMBO J. 39, e104150 (2020). 32347567 PMC7265247 · DOI
  68. [73]Engelhardt et al. CKAMP44: a brain-specific protein attenuating short-term synaptic plasticity in the dentate gyrus. Science 327, 1518–1522 (2010). 20185686 · DOI
  69. [74]Coleman, S. K., Cai, C., Mottershead, D. G., Haapalahti, J.-P. & Keinänen, K. Surface Expression of GluR-D AMPA Receptor Is Dependent on an Interaction between Its C-Terminal Domain and a 4.1. Protein J. Neurosci. 23, 798–806 (2003). 12574408 PMC6741938 · DOI
  70. [75]Shen, L., Liang, F., Walensky, L. D. & Huganir, R. L. Regulation of AMPA Receptor GluR1 Subunit Surface Expression by a 4.1N-Linked Actin Cytoskeletal Association. J. Neurosci. 20, 7932–7940 (2000). 11050113 PMC6772741 · DOI
  71. [76]Lin, D.-T. et al. Regulation of AMPA receptor extrasynaptic insertion by 4.1N, phosphorylation and palmitoylation. Nat. Neurosci. 12, 879–887 (2009). 19503082 PMC2712131 · DOI · Paper page
  72. [77]Adam, A. R. et al. Transcriptional diversity in specific synaptic gene sets discriminates cortical neuronal identity. Biol. Direct 18, 22 (2023). 37161421 PMC10170694 · DOI
  73. [78]Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. JMLR 2825, 2830 (2011).
  74. [79]Bayés, A. et al. Evolution of complexity in the zebrafish synapse proteome. Nat. Commun. 8, 14613 (2017). 28252024 PMC5337974 · DOI
  75. [80]Bayés, A. et al. Human post-mortem synapse proteome integrity screening for proteomic studies of postsynaptic complexes. Mol. Brain 7, 88 (2014). 25429717 PMC4271336 · DOI
  76. [81]Sanchez-Aguilera, A. et al. An update to Hippocampome.org by integrating single-cell phenotypes with circuit function in vivo. PLoS Biol. 19, e3001213 (2021). 33956790 PMC8130934 · DOI
  77. [82]Wheeler, D. W. et al. Hippocampome.org 2.0 is a knowledge base enabling data-driven spiking neural network simulations of rodent hippocampal circuits. eLife 12, RP90597 (2024). 38345923 PMC10942544 · DOI
  78. [83]Fidzinski, P., Shor, O. & Behr, J. Target-cell-specific bidirectional synaptic plasticity at hippocampal output synapses. Eur. J. Neurosci. 27, 1111–1118 (2008). 18312585 · DOI
  79. [84]Alkadhi, K. A. NMDA receptor-independent LTP in mammalian nervous system. Prog. Neurobiol. 200, 101986 (2021). 33400965 · DOI
  80. [85]Sindreu, C., Palmiter, R. D. & Storm, D. R. Zinc transporter ZnT-3 regulates presynaptic Erk1/2 signaling and hippocampus-dependent memory. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 108, 3366–3370 (2011). 21245308 PMC3044399 · DOI
  81. [86]Runge, K., Cardoso, C. & Chevigny, A. de. Dendritic spine plasticity: function and mechanisms. Front. Synaptic Neurosci. 12, 36 (2020). 32982715 PMC7484486 · DOI
  82. [87]Favuzzi, E. et al. Activity-dependent gating of parvalbumin interneuron function by the perineuronal net protein brevican. Neuron 95, 639–655.e10 (2017). 28712654 · DOI · Paper page
  83. [88]Saroja, S. R. et al. Hippocampal proteoglycans brevican and versican are linked to spatial memory of Sprague–Dawley rats in the morris water maze. J. Neurochem 130, 797–804 (2014). 24903590 · DOI
  84. [90]Frischknecht, R. et al. Brain extracellular matrix affects AMPA receptor lateral mobility and short-term synaptic plasticity. Nat. Neurosci. 12, 897–904 (2009). 19483686 · DOI · Paper page
  85. [91]Keller, A., Nesvizhskii, A. I., Kolker, E. & Aebersold, R. Empirical statistical model to estimate the accuracy of peptide identifications made by ms/ms and database search. Anal. Chem. 74, 5383–5392 (2002). 12403597 · DOI
  86. [92]Nesvizhskii, A. I., Keller, A., Kolker, E. & Aebersold, R. A statistical model for identifying proteins by tandem mass spectrometry. Anal. Chem. 75, 4646–4658 (2003). 14632076 · DOI
  87. [93]Schindelin, J. et al. Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat. methods 9, 676–682 (2012). 22743772 PMC3855844 · DOI · Paper page
  88. [94]Durinck, S., Spellman, P. T., Birney, E. & Huber, W. Mapping identifiers for the integration of genomic datasets with the R/Bioconductor package biomaRt. Nat. Protoc. 4, 1184–1191 (2009). 19617889 PMC3159387 · DOI
  89. [95]Hao, Y. et al. Dictionary learning for integrative, multimodal and scalable single-cell analysis. Nat. Biotechnol. 1–12 10.1038/s41587-023-01767-y (2023). PMC10928517 37231261 · DOI · Paper page
  90. [96]Becht, E. et al. Dimensionality reduction for visualizing single-cell data using UMAP. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 38–44 (2019). 30531897 · DOI · Paper page
  91. [97]Perez-Riverol, Y. et al. The PRIDE database resources in 2022: a hub for mass spectrometry-based proteomics evidences. Nucleic Acids Res 50, D543–D552 (2021). PMC8728295 34723319 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reig-Viader, R., del Castillo-Berges, D., Burgas-Pau, A., Arco-Alonso, D., Zerpa-Rios, O., Ramos-Vicente, D., Picañol, J., Castellanos, A., Soto, D., Roher, N., Sindreu, C., & Bayés, À.
Affiliations
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
  • Institut de Recerca Sant Pau (ES)
  • Universitat de Barcelona (ES)
  • Consorci Institut D'Investigacions Biomediques August Pi I Sunyer (ES)
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES)
Corresponding author
Bayés, Àlex
ORCID
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2025-11-25
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
10487-10487
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41467-025-65490-9
PMC
PMC12647736
OpenAlex
W4416667867
Cited by
6
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 6
FWCI
2.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • IRTA (Institut de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentaries) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Centres de Recerca de Catalunya
  • Generalitat de Catalunya (2017-SGR)
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
  • Agència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca (AC17/00005, 2017SGR, 2017 SGR 1776, 2021 SGR 01005, RTI2018-097037-B-I00, SGR 01005)
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III (2017 SGR 1776, RTI2018-097037-B-I00, AC17/00005)
  • Agencia Estatal de Investigación (AC17/00005, RTI2018-097037-B-I00, PID2021, 2017 SGR 1776)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Keywords
synaptic proteome, glutamate receptors, synaptic diversity, hippocampus, trisynaptic circuit, synapse types, neuron-specific gene expression, synaptic physiology
MeSH terms
Animals, Hippocampus, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Neurons, Synapses, Receptors, Glutamate, Proteome, Gene Expression Profiling, Proteomics, Mice, Transcriptome

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