Cited by 38Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Distinct AMPA-Type Glutamatergic Synapses in Developing Rat CA1 Hippocampus

Open access
Stubblefield, Elizabeth A., Benke, Tim A.·2010·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

We assessed synaptic α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazole propionate receptor (AMPAR) properties during synaptogenesis to describe the development of individual glutamatergic synapses on rat hippocampal CA1 principal neurons. Pharmacologically isolated AMPAR-mediated glutamatergic synaptic currents [evoked by stimulation of the Schaffer Collateral pathway, excitatory postsynaptic currents (EPSCs)], had significantly greater inward-rectification at ages P5-7 compared with P8-18. These inward rectifying EPSCs demonstrated paired-pulse dependent unblocking at positive holding potentials, consistent with voltage-dependent internal polyamine block. Measurements of paired-pulse facilitation did not support altered presynaptic properties associated with inward rectification. Using asynchronous EPSCs (aEPSCs) to analyze populations of individual synapses, we found that quantal amplitudes (Q) increased across early postnatal development (P5-P18) and were directly modulated by increases in the number of activated receptors. Quantal AMPAR decay kinetics (aEPSC τ(decay)s) exhibited the highest coefficient of variation (CV) from P5 to 7 and became markedly less variable at P8-18. At P5-7, faster quantal kinetics coexisted with much slower kinetics; only slower quantal kinetics were found at P8-18. This supports diverse quantal synaptic properties limited to P5-7. Multivariate cluster analysis of Q, CV(τ decay), and median τ(decay) supported a segregation of neurons into two distinct age…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.00099.2010

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stubblefield, E. A., & Benke, T. A.
Affiliations
  • Departments of Pharmacology,
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
Corresponding author
Benke, Tim A.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
2010-10
Volume
104
Issue
4
Pages
1899-1912
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2119534814
Cited by
38
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007635)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (K02NS056090, NS-056090)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
AMPA receptors, glutamatergic synapses, synaptogenesis, hippocampal CA1, principal neurons, excitatory postsynaptic currents, quantal analysis, inward rectification, polyamine block, paired-pulse facilitation, calcium-permeable AMPA receptors, postnatal development, Schaffer collateral pathway, receptor density
MeSH terms
Animals, Animals, Newborn, Cell Differentiation, Female, Male, Organ Culture Techniques, Synapses, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Receptors, AMPA, Excitatory Postsynaptic Potentials, Rats, CA1 Region, Hippocampal

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