Cited by 466Memory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeural dynamics and brain function

Laminar selectivity of the cholinergic suppression of synaptic transmission in rat hippocampal region CA1: computational modeling and brain slice physiology

Open access
Hasselmo, ME, Schnell, E·1994·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

ACh may set the dynamics of cortical function to those appropriate for learning new information. In models of the putative associative memory function of piriform cortex, selective suppression of intrinsic but not afferent fiber synaptic transmission by ACh prevents recall of previous input from interfering with the learning of new input (Hasselmo, 1993). Selective cholinergic suppression may play a similar role in the hippocampal formation, where Schaffer collateral synapses in stratum radiatum (s. rad) may store associations between activity in region CA3 and the entorhinal cortex input to region CA1 terminating in stratum lacunosum-moleculare (s. l-m). A computational model of region CA1 predicts that for effective associative memory function of the Schaffer collaterals, cholinergic suppression of synaptic transmission should be stronger in s. rad than in s. l-m. In the hippocampal slice preparation, we tested the effect of the cholinergic agonist carbachol (0.01–500 microM) on synaptic transmission in s. rad and s. l-m. Stimulating and recording electrodes were simultaneously placed in both layers, allowing analysis of the effect of carbachol on synaptic potentials in both layers during the same perfusion in each slice. Carbachol produced a significantly stronger suppression of stimulus- evoked EPSPs in s. rad than in s. l-m at all concentrations greater than 1 microM. At 100 microM, EPSP initial slopes were suppressed by 89.1 +/- 3.0% in s. rad, but only by 40.1 +/- 4.1% in s. l-m. The muscarinic antagonist atropine (1 microM) blocked cholinergic suppression in both layers. These data support the hypothesis that synaptic modification of the Schaffer collaterals may store associations between activity in region CA3 and the afferent input to region CA1 from the entorhinal cortex. In simulations, feedback regulation of cholinergic modulation based on activity in region CA1 sets the appropriate dynamics of learning for novel associations, and recall for familiar associations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.14-06-03898.1994

Cites

83 of 83 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?

  • In the CA1 region of the hippocampus, long-range perforant inputs from the entorhinal cortex are less inhibited by acetylcholine than the Schaeffer collaterals arising from CA3.

    “Indeed, in the CA1 region of the hippocampus, long-range perforant inputs from the entorhinal cortex are less inhibited by ACh than the Schaeffer collaterals arising from CA3 (Hasselmo and Schnell, 1994).”
  • During encoding, the synapses being modified must not influence their postsynaptic target, to avoid distorting the stored representation.

    “During encoding the synapses being modified must not influence their postsynaptic target, to avoid distorting the stored representation (Hasselmo and Bower, 1992, 1993; Hasselmo and Schnell, 1994).”

    From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Hasselmo and Schnell, 1994

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hasselmo, M., & Schnell, E.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
1994-06-01
Volume
14
Issue
6
Pages
3898-3914
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2161627797
Cited by
466
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 19
FWCI
8.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Office of Naval Research
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
cholinergic modulation, acetylcholine, hippocampal CA1, Schaffer collateral synapses, stratum radiatum, stratum lacunosum-moleculare, synaptic transmission, carbachol, muscarinic receptors, atropine, associative memory, computational model
MeSH terms
Animals, Association Learning, Atropine, Bicuculline, Brain, Carbachol, Feedback, Female, Hippocampus, Models, Neurological, Synaptic Transmission, Parasympathomimetics, Mental Recall, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Rats

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