Cited by 402Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling

Dopamine–Glutamate Interactions Controlling Prefrontal Cortical Pyramidal Cell Excitability Involve Multiple Signaling Mechanisms

Open access
Tseng, Kuei Y., O'Donnell, Patricio·2004·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Although the importance of dopamine (DA) for prefrontal cortical (PFC) cognitive functions is widely recognized, the nature of DA actions in the PFC remains controversial. A critical component in DA actions is its modulation of glutamate transmission, which can be different when specific receptors are activated. To obtain a clear picture of cellular mechanisms involved in these interactions, we studied the effects of DA–glutamate coactivation on pyramidal cell excitability in brain slices obtained from developmentally mature rats using whole-cell patch-clamp recordings. Bath application of NMDA, AMPA, and the D1 agonist SKF38393 induced concentration-dependent excitability increases, whereas bath application of the D2 receptor agonist quinpirole induced a concentration-dependent excitability decrease. The NMDA-mediated response was potentiated by SKF38393. This NMDA–D1 synergism required postsynaptic intracellular Ca 2+and protein kinase A (PKA) and was independent of membrane depolarization. On the other hand, the excitatory effects of both NMDA and AMPA were attenuated by a D2 agonist. Surprisingly, the D2–NMDA interaction was also blocked by the GABA A antagonists bicuculline and picrotoxin, suggesting that the inhibitory action of D2 receptors on NMDA-induced responses in the PFC may be mediated by GABAergic interneurons. In contrast, the D2–AMPA interaction involves inhibition of PKA and activation of phospholipase lipase C–IP 3 and intracellular Ca 2+at a postsynaptic level. Thus, the modulatory actions of D1 and D2 receptors on PFC pyramidal cell excitability are mediated by multiple intracellular mechanisms and by activation of GABA A receptors, depending on the glutamate receptor subtypes involved.

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.1021-04.2004

Cites

45 of 45 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?

  • Noradrenergic and dopaminergic projections towards forebrain regions, as well as dopaminergic-glutamatergic and dopaminergic-cholinergic interactions, control PFC maturation and functioning.

    “The same holds true for noradrenergic and dopaminergic projections towards forebrain regions as well as dopaminergic-glutamatergic and dopaminergic-cholinergic interactions controlling PFC maturation and functioning [227, 228, 231].”

    From Development of prefrontal cortex (2022) · cites this paper as [227]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says dopaminergic neurons project to the PFC and that dopamine–glutamate interactions may be essential for PFC function. The paper studies those interactions in developmentally mature rats, but does not establish that they control PFC maturation or address noradrenergic projections or dopamine–cholinergic interactions. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • During embryonic development there is convergence of the various neurotransmitter signaling pathways and they influence each other's development and functioning.

    “There is, furthermore, ample evidence now that during embryonic development there is convergence of the various neurotransmitter signaling pathways and influence each other’s development and functioning [153, 227–231].”

    From Development of prefrontal cortex (2022) · cites this paper as [227]

    The Introduction says dopamine affects glutamate function, and the Discussion examines their interactions in prefrontal neurons. But the study used developmentally mature rats (postnatal days 42–65); it does not establish convergence during embryonic development or that neurotransmitter pathways influence one another’s development. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Ascending neuromodulatory neurotransmitter systems, such as dopaminergic and cholinergic projections, have exactly the right characteristics: they are driven by activity in presynaptic connections and can affect activity through classical neuromodulatory effects at the post-synaptic membrane, while also enabling potentiation of connection strengths.

    “Happily, the ascending neuromodulatory neurotransmitter systems, such as dopaminergic and cholinergic projections, have exactly the right characteristics: they are driven by activity in presynaptic connections and can affect activity though classical neuromodulatory effects at the post-synaptic membrane [65], while also enabling potentiation of connection strengths [66],[67].”

    From Hierarchical Models in the Brain (2008) · cites this paper as [65]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tseng, K. Y., & O'Donnell, P.
Affiliations
Albany Medical College (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2004-06-02
Volume
24
Issue
22
Pages
5131-5139
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2057749702
Cited by
402
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 27
FWCI
9.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
  • National Institutes of Health (MH57683)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH57683, R56MH057683, R01MH057683)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Receptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Keywords
dopamine-glutamate interaction, prefrontal cortex, dopamine D1 receptor, dopamine D2 receptor, NMDA receptor, AMPA receptors, protein kinase A, intracellular calcium, GABAergic interneurons, GABAA receptor, synaptic modulation
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Calcium, Dopamine, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Synergism, Male, Reaction Time, Signal Transduction, N-Methylaspartate, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Prefrontal Cortex, Receptors, Dopamine D1, Receptors, Dopamine D2, Cyclic AMP-Dependent Protein Kinases, Pyramidal Cells, alpha-Amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic Acid, Patch-Clamp Techniques, Dopamine Agonists, Dopamine Antagonists, Excitatory Amino Acid Agonists, Glutamic Acid, GABA Antagonists, Rats, Dopamine D2 Receptor Antagonists, 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