Cited by 2,083Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeural dynamics and brain functionMemory and Neural Mechanisms

CORTICAL PLASTICITY: From Synapses to Maps

Buonomano, Dean V., Merzenich, Michael M.·1998·Annual Review of Neuroscience

Abstract

It has been clear for almost two decades that cortical representations in adult animals are not fixed entities, but rather, are dynamic and are continuously modified by experience. The cortex can preferentially allocate area to represent the particular peripheral input sources that are proportionally most used. Alterations in cortical representations appear to underlie learning tasks dependent on the use of the behaviorally important peripheral inputs that they represent. The rules governing this cortical representational plasticity following manipulations of inputs, including learning, are increasingly well understood. In parallel with developments in the field of cortical map plasticity, studies of synaptic plasticity have characterized specific elementary forms of plasticity, including associative long-term potentiation and long-term depression of excitatory postsynaptic potentials. Investigators have made many important strides toward understanding the molecular underpinnings of these fundamental plasticity processes and toward defining the learning rules that govern their induction. The fields of cortical synaptic plasticity and cortical map plasticity have been implicitly linked by the hypothesis that synaptic plasticity underlies cortical map reorganization. Recent experimental and theoretical work has provided increasingly stronger support for this hypothesis. The goal of the current paper is to review the fields of both synaptic and cortical map plasticity with an em…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.neuro.21.1.149

Cites

190 of 190 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • These theoretical predictions are entirely consistent with empirical and computational characterisations of plasticity.

    “These theoretical predictions are entirely consistent with empirical and computational characterisations of plasticity [56],[57].”

    From Hierarchical Models in the Brain (2008) · cites this paper as [56]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 192 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buonomano, D. V., & Merzenich, M. M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Venue
Annual Review of Neuroscience
Published
1998-03
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
149-186
ISSN
  • 0147-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4126
OpenAlex
W2158935809
Cited by
2,083
References
192
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 67 · 2017: 61 · 2016: 61 · 2015: 78 · 2014: 72 · 2013: 95 · 2012: 98
FWCI
8.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annual Review of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Public Health Service (10414)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
cortical plasticity, synaptic plasticity, long-term potentiation, long-term depression, excitatory postsynaptic potentials, learning rules
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Neuronal Plasticity, Synapses

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