Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 368

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Distinct frequency preferences of different types of rat hippocampal neurones in response to oscillatory input currents

Open access
Pike, Fenella G., Goddard, Ruth S., Suckling, Jillian M., Ganter, Paul, Kasthuri, Narayanan, Paulsen, Ole·2000·The Journal of Physiology

Abstract

1. Coherent network oscillations in several distinct frequency bands are seen in the hippocampus of behaving animals. To investigate how different neuronal types within this network respond to oscillatory inputs we made whole-cell current clamp recordings from three different types of neurones in the CA1 region of rat hippocampal slices: pyramidal cells, fast-spiking interneurones and horizontal interneurones, and recorded their response to sinusoidal inputs at physiologically relevant frequencies (1-100 Hz). 2. Pyramidal neurones showed firing preference to inputs at theta frequencies (range 2-7 Hz; n = 30). They showed subthreshold resonance in the same frequency range (2-7 Hz; mean 4.1 +/- 0.4 Hz; n = 19). 3. Interneurones differed in their firing properties. Horizontal interneurones in the stratum oriens showed firing preference to inputs at theta frequencies (range 1.5-10 Hz; n = 10). These interneurones also showed resonance at low frequencies (range 1-5 Hz; mean 2.4 +/- 0.5 Hz; n = 7). In contrast, fast-spiking interneurones with cell bodies in the pyramidal cell layer fired preferentially at input frequencies in the gamma band (range 30-50 Hz; n = 10/12). These interneurones showed resonance at beta-gamma frequencies (10-50 Hz; mean 26 +/- 5 Hz; n = 7/8). 4. Thus, in the hippocampus, different types of neurones have distinct frequency preferences. Therefore, in the CA1 layer of the hippocampal network, a compound oscillatory input may be segregated into distinct frequency components which are processed locally by distinct types of neurones.

Overview

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 · 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.00205.x

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Cited by

See all 368

Metadata

Authors
Pike, F. G., Goddard, R. S., Suckling, J. M., Ganter, P., Kasthuri, N., & Paulsen, O.
Venue
The Journal of Physiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-11
Volume
529
Issue
1
Pages
205-213
ISSN
  • 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7793
OpenAlex
W2023925279
Cited by
368
References
9
FWCI
4.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Distinct frequency preferences of different types of rat hippocampal neurones in response to oscillatory input currents. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.00205.x
The paper
Pike, F. G., Goddard, R. S., Suckling, J. M., Ganter, P., Kasthuri, N., & Paulsen, O. (2000). Distinct frequency preferences of different types of rat hippocampal neurones in response to oscillatory input currents. The Journal of Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.00205.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.