Cited by 251Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchVisual perception and processing mechanismsNeural dynamics and brain function

Persistence of Experience-Induced Homeostatic Synaptic Plasticity through Adulthood in Superficial Layers of Mouse Visual Cortex

Open access
Goel, A., Lee, H.-K.·2007·Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

It is well established that sensory cortices of animals can be modified by sensory experience, especially during a brief early critical period in development. Theoretical analyses indicate that there are two synaptic plasticity mechanisms required: input-specific synaptic modifications and global homeostatic mechanisms to provide stability to neural networks. Experience-dependent homeostatic synaptic plasticity mechanisms have subsequently been demonstrated in the visual cortex of juvenile animals. Here, we report that experience-dependent homeostatic synaptic plasticity persists through adulthood in the superficial layers of the mouse visual cortex. We found that 2 d of visual deprivation in the form of dark rearing is necessary and sufficient to cause an increase in AMPA receptor-mediated miniature EPSC amplitude in layer 2/3 neurons. This increase was rapidly reversed by 1 d of light exposure. This reversible change in synaptic strength persisted in adult mice past the critical period for ocular dominance plasticity, which is reported to end at approximately 1 month of age in rodents. Interestingly, the mechanism of homeostatic synaptic modifications in 3-month-old mice differed from that in young mice (3 weeks old) in that the multiplicative nature of synaptic scaling is lost. Our results demonstrate that the superficial layers of adult mouse visual cortex retain the ability to undergo reversible experience-dependent homeostatic synaptic plasticity.

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.5038-06.2007

Cites

8 of 8 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?

  • These two modes of deprivation may induce different forms of compensatory synaptic plasticity.

    “In contrast, dark rearing increases the abundance of GluA2-lacking receptors and requires GluA1 phosphorylation, suggesting that these two modes of deprivation may induce different forms of compensatory synaptic plasticity (Goel and Lee 2007;Goel et al. 2011).”

    From Homeostatic Synaptic Plasticity: Local and Global Mechanisms for Stabilizing Neuronal Function (2012) · cites this paper as Goel and Lee 2007

    The Results section reports that dark rearing increases AMPA receptor-mediated mEPSC amplitude, supporting compensatory synaptic plasticity. The Discussion describes possible differences between scaling synapses up and down, but does not compare the two modes of deprivation in the citing sentence or establish that they induce different forms of plasticity. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Dark rearing increases the abundance of GluA2-lacking receptors and requires GluA1 phosphorylation.

    “In contrast, dark rearing increases the abundance of GluA2-lacking receptors and requires GluA1 phosphorylation, suggesting that these two modes of deprivation may induce different forms of compensatory synaptic plasticity (Goel and Lee 2007;Goel et al. 2011).”

    From Homeostatic Synaptic Plasticity: Local and Global Mechanisms for Stabilizing Neuronal Function (2012) · cites this paper as Goel and Lee 2007

    The Results section (page unavailable) reports that two days of dark rearing increased AMPA receptor-mediated mEPSC amplitude in mouse visual cortex. The Discussion (page unavailable) says dark rearing increased GluR1 (GluA1) phosphorylation, but our copy does not establish that phosphorylation is required or that GluA2-lacking receptors become more abundant. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In visual cortex, expression of synaptic scaling is developmentally regulated: it is expressed by layer 4 pyramidal neurons early in postnatal development, then turns off in layer 4 and begins in layer 2/3 around the opening of the classical visual system critical period, persisting into adulthood.

    “In visual cortex the expression of synaptic scaling is developmentally regulated (Desai et al. 2002;Maffei et al. 2004Maffei et al. , 2006;;Maffei and Turrigiano 2008); synaptic scaling is expressed by pyramidal neurons in layer 4 early in postnatal development, but then turns off in layer 4 and begins to be expressed in layer 2/3 pyramidal neurons around the opening of the classical visual system”

    From Homeostatic Synaptic Plasticity: Local and Global Mechanisms for Stabilizing Neuronal Function (2012) · cites this paper as Goel and Lee 2007

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports scaling in layer 4 at P14–P16 but not P21–P23, with the opposite pattern in layer 2/3; it also says the authors’ data extend layer 2/3 plasticity through adulthood. Our copy does not establish that the switch coincides with the opening of the classical visual critical period, or identify the early layer 4 cells specifically as pyramidal neurons. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The same visual deprivation paradigm that scales minis up in younger mice produces nonmultiplicative changes in minis in older mice.

    “This possibility is raised by the finding that the same visual deprivation paradigm that scales minis up in younger mice produces nonmultiplicative changes in minis in older mice, suggesting that not all synapses are affected equally (Goel and Lee 2007); however, this could also reflect the simultaneous activation of synaptic scaling and Hebbian, synapse-specific mechanisms (see Turrigiano 2011”

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
Goel, A., & Lee, H.-K.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2007-06-20
Volume
27
Issue
25
Pages
6692-6700
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1985322212
Cited by
251
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 21
FWCI
5.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Eye Institute (R01EY014882)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
homeostatic plasticity, experience-dependent plasticity, visual cortex, dark rearing, visual deprivation, AMPA receptors, miniature EPSCs, layer 2/3 neurons, synaptic scaling, critical period, ocular dominance, adult plasticity, mouse visual cortex
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Animals, Animals, Newborn, Darkness, Homeostasis, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Neuronal Plasticity, Sensory Deprivation, Visual Cortex, Visual Pathways, Mice

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