Cited by 117

Distinct structural and ionotropic roles of NMDA receptors in controlling spine and synapse stability

Alvarez, Veronica A., Ridenour, Dennis A., Sabatini, Bernardo L.·2007·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

NMDA-type glutamate receptors (NMDARs) play a central role in the rapid regulation of synaptic transmission, but their contribution to the long-term stabilization of glutamatergic synapses is unknown. We find that, in hippocampal pyramidal neurons in rat organotypic slices, pharmacological blockade of NMDARs does not affect synapse formation and dendritic spine growth but does increase the motility of spines. Physical loss of synaptic NMDARs induced by RNA interference against the NR1 subunit of the receptor also increases the motility of spines. Furthermore, knock-down of NMDARs, but not their pharmacological block, destabilizes spine structure and over time leads to loss of spines and excitatory synapses. Maintenance of normal spine density requires the coexpression of two specific splice isoforms of the NR1 subunit that contain the C-terminal C2 cassette. Thus, although ionotropic properties of NMDARs induce synaptic plasticity, it is the physical interactions of the C-tail of the receptor that mediate the long-term stabilization of synapses and spines.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.0956-07.2007

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Nagerl UV, Eberhorn N, Cambridge SB, Bonhoeffer T (2004) Bidirectional activity-dependent morphological plasticity in hippocampal neurons. Neuron 44:759 -767.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alvarez, V. A., Ridenour, D. A., & Sabatini, B. L.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2007-07-11
Volume
27
Issue
28
Pages
7365-7376
ISSN
  • 0270-6474
  • 1529-2401
Cited by
117
References
6
Language
en

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