CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 228Memory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeural dynamics and brain function

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Muscarinic Modulation of the Oscillatory and Repetitive Firing Properties of Entorhinal Cortex Layer II Neurons

Klink, Ruby, Alonso, Angel·1997·Journal of Neurophysiology
DOI 10.1152/jn.1997.77.4.1813
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Klink, Ruby and Angel Alonso. Muscarinic modulation of the oscillatory and repetitive firing properties of entorhinal cortex layer II neurons. J. Neurophysiol. 77: 1813–1828, 1997. Neurons in layer II of the entorhinal cortex (EC) are key elements in the temporal lobe memory system because they integrate and transfer into the hippocampal formation convergent sensory input from the entire cortical mantle. EC layer II also receives a profuse cholinergic innervation from the basal forebrain that promotes oscillatory dynamics in the EC network and may also implement memory function. To understand the cellular basis of cholinergic actions in EC, we investigated by intracellular recording in an in vitro rat brain slice preparation the muscarinic modulation of the electroresponsive properties of the two distinct classes of medial EC layer II projection neurons, the stellate cells (SCs) and non-SCs. In both SCs and non-SCs, muscarinic receptor activation with carbachol (CCh, 10–50 μM) caused atropine-sensitive (300 nM) membrane depolarization. In SCs, the CCh-induced membrane depolarization was associated with subthreshold membrane potential oscillations and “spike cluster” discharge, which are typically expressed by these cells on depolarization. CCh, however, caused a decrease of the dominant frequency of the membrane potential oscillations from 9.2 ± 1.1 (SD) Hz to 6.3 ± 1.1 Hz, as well as a decrease of the intracluster firing frequency from 18.1 ± 1.7 Hz to 13.6 ± 1.3 Hz. In addition, spike cluster discharge was less robust, and the cells tended to shift into tonic firing during CCh. In contrast to SCs, in non-SCs, CCh drastically affected firing behavior by promoting the development of voltage-dependent, long-duration (1–5 s) slow bursts of action potentials that could repeat rhythmically at slow frequencies (0.2–0.5 Hz). Concomitantly, the slow afterhyperpolarization (sAHP) was replaced by long-lasting plateau postdepolarizations. In both SCs and non-SCs, CCh also produced conspicuous changes on the action potential waveform and its afterpotentials. Notably, CCh significantly decreased spike amplitude and rate of rise, which suggests muscarinic modulation of a voltage-dependent Na+conductance. Finally, we also observed that whereas CCh abolished the sAHP in both SCs and non-SCs, the membrane-permeant analogues of adenosine 3′,5′-cyclic monophosphate, 8-(4-chlorophenylthio)-adenosine-cyclic monophosphate and 8-bromo-adenosine-cyclic-monophosphate, abolished the sAHP in SCs but not in non-SCs. The data demonstrate that cholinergic modulation further differentiates the intrinsic electroresponsiveness of SCs and non-SCs, and add support to the presence of two parallel processing systems in medial EC layer II that could thereby differentially influence their hippocampal targets. The results also indicate an important role for the cholinergic system in tuning the oscillatory dynamics of entorhinal neurons.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1997.77.4.1813

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 82 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Damasio A. R., 1990, Semin. Neurosci., 2, 287
  2. Howe A. R., 1994, Soc. Neurosc. Abstr., 20, 238.9
  3. Klink R., 1992, Soc. Neurosci. Abstr., 18, 317.4
  4. Ramon y Cajal S., 1902, Trab. Lab. Invest. Biol. Univ. Madrid, 1, 189

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 226

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Klink, R., & Alonso, A.
Affiliations
  • Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital (CA)
  • Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Montreal Neurological Institute and McGill University, Montreal, Quebec H3A 2B4, Canada
ORCID
Klink, Ruby
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Publisher
American Physiological Society
Published
1997-04-01
Volume
77
Issue
4
Pages
1813-1828
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
DOI
10.1152/jn.1997.77.4.1813
OpenAlex
W5055497
Cited by
228
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 17
FWCI
4.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
muscarinic receptors, cholinergic modulation, stellate cells, membrane potential oscillations, slow afterhyperpolarization, carbachol, atropine, repetitive firing, hippocampal formation, action potential waveform
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Cyclic AMP, Animals, Biological Clocks, Carbachol, Male, Membrane Potentials, Neurons, Receptors, Muscarinic, Tetrodotoxin, Pyramidal Cells, Muscarinic Agonists, Entorhinal Cortex, Rats, In Vitro Techniques

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