Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 249

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pre‐ and postsynaptic glutamate receptors at a giant excitatory synapse in rat auditory brainstem slices.

Open access
Barnes‐Davies, M, Forsythe, I D·1995·The Journal of Physiology

Abstract

1. Whole‐cell patch recordings were used to examine the EPSC generated by the calyx of Held in neurones of the medial nucleus of the trapezoid body (MNTB). Each neurone receives a somatic input from a single calyx (giant synapse). 2. A slow NMDA receptor‐mediated EPSC peaked in 10 ms and decayed as a double exponential with time constants of 44 and 147 ms. A fast EPSC had a mean rise time of 356 microseconds (at 25 degrees C), while the decay was described by a double exponential with time constants of 0.70 and 3.43 ms. 3. Cyclothiazide slowed the decay of the fast EPSC, indicating that it is mediated by AMPA receptors. The slower time constant was slowed to a greater extent than the faster time constant. Cyclothiazide potentiated EPSC amplitude, partly by a presynaptic mechanism. 4. The metabotropic glutamate receptor (mGluR) agonists, 1S,3S‐ACPD, 1S,3R‐ACPD and L‐2‐amino‐4‐phosphonobutyrate (L‐AP4) reversibly depressed EPSC amplitude. A dose‐response curve for 1S,3S‐ACPD gave an EC50 of 7 microM and a Hill coefficient of 1.2. 5. Analysis of the coefficient of variation ratio showed that the above mGluR agonists acted presynaptically to reduce the probability of transmitter release. Adenosine and baclofen also depressed transmission by a presynaptic mechanism. 6. alpha‐Methyl‐4‐carboxyphenylglycine (MCPG; 0.5‐1 mM) did not antagonize the effects of 1S,3S‐ACPD, while high concentrations of L‐2‐amino‐3‐phosphonopropionic acid (L‐AP3; 1 mM) and 4‐carboxy‐3‐hydroxyphenyglycine (4C3HPG; 500 microM) depressed transmission. 7. There was a power relationship between [Ca2+]o and EPSC amplitude with co‐operativity values ranging from 1.5 to 3.4. 8. The mechanism by which mGluRs modulate transmitter release appeared to be independent of presynaptic Ca2+ or K+ currents, since ACPD caused no change in the level of paired‐pulse facilitation or the duration of the presynaptic action potential (observed by direct recording from the terminal), indicating that the presynaptic mGluR transduction mechanism may be coupled to part of the exocytotic machinery. 9. Our data are not consistent with the presence at the calyx of Held of any one known mGluR subtype. Comparison of the time course and pharmacology of the fast EPSC with data from cloned AMPA receptors is consistent with the idea that GluR‐Do subunits dominate the postsynaptic channels.

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 · 10.1113/jphysiol.1995.sp020974

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 249

Metadata

Authors
Barnes‐Davies, M., & Forsythe, I. D.
Venue
The Journal of Physiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1995-10-15
Volume
488
Issue
2
Pages
387-406
ISSN
  • 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7793
OpenAlex
W2016016372
Cited by
249
References
1
FWCI
5.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Pre‐ and postsynaptic glutamate receptors at a giant excitatory synapse in rat auditory brainstem slices. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1113/jphysiol.1995.sp020974
The paper
Barnes‐Davies, M., & Forsythe, I. D. (1995). Pre‐ and postsynaptic glutamate receptors at a giant excitatory synapse in rat auditory brainstem slices. The Journal of Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1995.sp020974

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.