The Journal of Neuroscience, September 3, 2003, 23(22):8109-8118
Previous Article | Next Article 
The Contribution of NMDA and AMPA Conductances to the Control of Spiking in Neurons of the Deep Cerebellar Nuclei
Volker Gauck1 and
Dieter Jaeger2
1Department of Cognitive Neurology, University of
Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany, and 2Department
of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
We performed whole-cell patch-clamp recordings in vitro to
investigate the integration of excitatory and inhibitory inputs in neurons of
the deep cerebellar nuclei (DCN) by applying synthetic synaptic input patterns
with dynamic clamping. We explored an input regime in which excitation and
inhibition had an ongoing baseline rate because both input pathways show
ongoing activity in vivo. We found that spiking was time-locked to
transients in the inputs, consisting of brief decreases in inhibitory or
increases in excitatory conductance. Such input transients were caused by
synchronization among multiple inputs. However, we found that temporal
synchrony in the inhibitory input pathway had preferential access to the
control of DCN spiking, because the large NMDA component of the excitatory
inputs smoothed out temporal transients in this pathway. Thus, synaptic
integration in the DCN appears to be tuned to allow the cerebellar cortical
output from Purkinje cells preferential access to the control of DCN spiking.
The effect of temporal modulations in the inhibition was further enhanced by
the voltage dependence of the NMDA inputs. Thus, the presence of a baseline of
mossy and climbing fiber inputs boosted depolarizing responses caused by
reduced inhibition by the voltage-dependent increase in inward NMDA current.
Overall, our results show that correlated activity or pauses in populations of
Purkinje cells are well suited to the dynamic control of DCN spiking. In
addition, strong transients in excitation can directly drive DCN responses
that bypass cerebellar cortical processing.
Key words: NMDA; AMPA; GABA; synaptic integration; cerebellum; coding
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
Neurons in the deep cerebellar nuclei (DCN) receive massive inhibitory
input from the Purkinje cells in the cerebellar cortex, which accounts for
>70% of all synapses in the DCN
(Palkovits et al., 1977
;
De Zeeuw and Berrebi, 1995
).
In a previous study we focused on how inhibitory input could control the
frequency and accuracy of DCN spiking
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
) using
the technique of dynamic clamping in vitro. We found that simulated
in vivo Purkinje cell inputs are in fact well suited for the control
of spike frequency and timing in DCN neurons. Nevertheless, beyond relaying
the output of cerebellar cortical processing to the rest of the brain, the DCN
also receive excitatory inputs that are mainly derived from collaterals of the
mossy fiber and climbing fiber input systems to cerebellar cortex. These
excitatory collaterals could in principle be well suited to drive DCN activity
patterns in a direct loop of cerebellar processing that bypasses the
cerebellar cortex altogether. It is thus important to gain an understanding of
whether the excitatory input conductances that may be expected in
vivo are likely to be sufficient to strongly modulate DCN spiking, and
how such excitatory control would interact with the inhibition exerted by
cerebellar cortex. The excitatory input is made more powerful and possibly
dynamically more complex by the presence of a large NMDA conductance, which is
only weakly voltage-dependent, even in the presence of magnesium
(Audinat et al., 1992
;
Anchisi et al., 2001
).
Furthermore, two NMDA components with different kinetics and different voltage
dependencies were described (Cull-Candy et
al., 1998
; Anchisi et al.,
2001
). Although the decay time constants of the NMDA current are
faster compared with many other cell types, they are still much longer than
the AMPA component also present. Based on these studies, the total charge
carried by NMDA current should far outweigh AMPA currents in DCN neurons. It
is thus important to understand how the specific kinetic properties and
voltage dependence of NMDA conductance in DCN neurons may be influencing the
process of synaptic integration and the ensuing control of spiking.
To examine excitatory input processing in DCN neurons, we performed a
dynamic clamp study in vitro analogous to our previous one focusing
only on inhibition (Gauck and Jaeger,
2000
). In vivo, DCN neurons receive ongoing input from
Purkinje cells, mossy fibers, and climbing fibers
(Eccles et al., 1971
;
Cazin et al., 1980
;
Savio and Tempia, 1985
;
Stratton et al., 1988
;
van Kan et al., 1993
;
Gamlin and Clarke, 1995
;
Matsuzaki and Kyuhou, 1997
).
Therefore, we simulated input conditions that mimicked an ongoing balance of
excitatory and inhibitory inputs. We found that the spiking of DCN neurons
could be determined by excitation as well as by inhibition depending on the
degree of synchronization within the respective input pathway. The presence of
a large NMDA conductance allowed inhibition to dominate in the control of
spike timing for most input patterns. Furthermore, the impact of fluctuations
in inhibition was enhanced by the voltage dependence of the slow NMDA
component.
 |
Materials and Methods
|
|---|
Electrophysiology. All animal procedures used in these studies
fully complied with the National Institutes of Health guidelines on animal
care and use. DCN neurons were recorded in sagittal cerebellar slices (250
µm) of 10- to 18-d-old male Sprague Dawley rats in whole-cell patch-clamp
mode. We were unsuccessful in recording from older animals, because fibers in
the DCN become very heavily myelinated beyond this age, which diminishes both
visibility and viability of neurons after slicing. No differences were found
in the morphology of DCN neurons from 8- or 20-d-old rats
(Sultan et al., 2003
),
suggesting that this structure matures early. We also found no differences in
response properties for neurons recorded between 10 and 18 d of age.
Electrodes had resistances between 4 and 7 M
and were filled with (in
mM): K-gluconate 140, HEPES 10, NaCl 10, EGTA 0.2, MgATP 4, NaGTP
0.4, and glutathione 5. The extracellular solution used for recording
contained (in mM): NaCl 124, KCl 3, KH2PO4
1.2, NaHCO3 26, CaCl2 2, MgSO4 1.9, and
glucose 20. Inhibitory synaptic inputs were blocked either with 40
µM bicuculline methiodide or with 10 µM
picrotoxin. Excitatory synaptic inputs were blocked with 100 µM
kynurenic acid. All chemicals were obtained from (Sigma, Deisenhofen,
Germany). Neurons in the DCN were selected visually to obtain recordings only
from cells with a soma diameter exceeding 15 µm, which has been described
as a defining characteristic of excitatory projection neurons
(Batini et al., 1992
). The
recording temperature was 32°C (i.e., between room temperature and
physiological temperature) to achieve a viable compromise between slow
kinetics at low temperatures and fast tissue degradation at 37°C when
recording in vitro. We cannot exclude that at 32°C the
excitability of the recorded cells was below that under in vivo
conditions because of slowed channel kinetics. Significant differences in
synaptic processing between these temperatures have not been reported,
however.
Dynamic current clamping. We used the technique of dynamic current
clamping (Robinson and Kawai,
1993
; Sharp et al.,
1993
) to inject synthetic synaptic input into DCN neurons in
vitro according to Equation 1: Iinj =
Gex(t) * (Vm -
Eex) + Gin(t) *
(Vm - Ein). The injected current
(Iinj) was updated on-line during the recording for each
sampling point at a rate of 10 kHz. To achieve this sampling rate with a
temporal precision in the microsecond range, we used a custom-made C-routine
(S. Melon and V. Gauck, unpublished software) running under the RT-Linux
operating system. The computer board used for data acquisition was a PCI-6052E
(National Instruments). The simulated excitatory
[Gex(t)] and inhibitory
[(Gin(t)] synaptic conductance traces were
calculated off-line before the recording and stored on hard disk. They
represent the temporal sum over all excitatory
[Gex(t) =
gex] and all
inhibitory [Gin(t) =
gin] input trains. The unitary conductances
gex and gin
(Fig. 1) were calculated as
dual-exponential functions according to Equation 2:
gunitary = 1/(
decay -
rise)*(e -t/
decay -
e -t/
rise). Before starting a recording,
Gex and Gin traces were loaded into
memory, and for each sampling time, ti, the appropriate
values Gex(ti) and
Gin(ti) were used together with the
recorded momentary membrane potential
Vm(ti) to update
Iinj(ti) (Eq. 1). The reversal
potentials for excitatory (Eex) and inhibitory input
(Ein) were 0 and -70 mV, respectively.

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Stimulus properties. A, Unitary conductance traces for AMPA
(gray), NMDA (black), and GABAA (dotted black) inputs. The
GABAA amplitude (peak of 69 pS) is scaled down to the AMPA peak
conductance (39 pS) to allow for a better comparison of the time course.
B, Current-voltage plot of the AMPA (gray) and NMDA peak currents
(black). Note that the NMDA current is 83% of AMPA at -60 mV but is more than
double the AMPA current positive to -30 mV. C, A 0.5 sec sample
segment of the excitatory conductance traces used in the experiments depicted
in Figures 3,
4,
5,
6,
7. The traces correspond to
synchronized AMPA input (AS, black), random AMPA input
(AR, dark gray), and synchronized, mixed AMPA-NMDA input
(ANS, light gray). The AMPA-NMDA trace shown here is given
for a constant membrane potential of -40 mV. D, A 0.5 sec sample
segment for inhibitory GABAA-type input for synchronized
(GS, black) and random (GR, gray)
input conditions. In this and the following figures, the line thickness was
increased for lines with lighter gray values to improve their visibility.
|
|

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3. Control of DCN spiking by a combination of synchronized AMPA-NMDA input
(ANS) and synchronized GABAA input
(GS). To isolate the effect of each pathway,
ANSGC combines synchronized excitatory
AMPA-NMDA input with constant inhibitory input (light gray).
ANCGS combines exclusively
voltage-modulated AMPA-NMDA input with synchronized inhibitory
GABAA input (dark gray).
ANSGS combines synchronized AMPA-NMDA
input with synchronized GABAA input (black). A, Voltage
response and corresponding spike raster plots to six stimulus presentations
from a typical DCN neuron. B, Spike rate averaged over 25 DCN neurons
(bars, mean ± SE) and spike rate averaged over six stimulus repetitions
from the individual DCN neuron shown in A (squares, mean ±
SD). C, Spike timing precision averaged over 25 DCN neurons (bars,
mean ± SE) and spike timing precision averaged over six stimulus
repetitions from the sample neuron (squares, mean ± SD). The precision
for repetitions of the same stimulus condition
(ANSGC,
ANSGS,
ANCGS) as well as stimuli identical
only for excitation (XAN) or inhibition (XG) are shown (see Results).
D, Spike-triggered averages of the excitatory conductance for all
three stimuli. The solid lines were calculated from the
Gex with voltage-dependent NMDA component, whereas the
dotted lines were calculated from voltage-independent but otherwise identical
versions of Gex that were created, assuming a constant
membrane potential of -40 mV (see Eq. 4). E, Spike-triggered averages
of the inhibitory conductance for all three stimuli. The data in D
and E are from the same neuron as in A.
|
|

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. Control of DCN spiking by a combination of synchronized AMPA-NMDA input and
random GABAA inputs. ANSGC
combines synchronized excitatory AMPA-NMDA input with constant inhibitory
input (light gray). ANCGR combines
exclusively voltage-modulated excitatory input with random inhibitory
GABAA-type input (black).
ANSGR combines synchronized AMPA-NMDA
input with random GABAA input (dark gray). A, Voltage
response and corresponding spike raster plots to six stimulus presentations
from a typical recording. B-E, Same analyses as shown in
Figure 3, but for the stimulus
set including random instead of synchronized inhibitory inputs (n =
10 neurons recorded).
|
|

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. Control of DCN spiking by a combination of synchronized AMPA input (NMDA
component replaced by increasing AMPA peak conductance) and synchronized
GABAA inputs. ASGC combines
synchronized excitatory AMPA input with constant inhibitory input (light
gray). ACGS combines constant
excitatory input with synchronized inhibitory GABAA type input
(dark gray). ASGS combines
synchronized AMPA input with synchronized GABAA input (black).
A, Voltage response and corresponding spike raster plots to six
stimulus presentations from a typical recording. B-E, Same analyses
as shown in Figures 3 and
4, but for the stimulus set
using synchronous AMPA inputs in the absence of NMDA and synchronous
GABAA inputs (n = 9 neurons recorded).
|
|

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6. Control of DCN spiking by a combination of random pure AMPA input and
synchronized GABAA inputs.
ARGC combines random excitatory AMPA
input with constant inhibitory input (light gray).
ACGS combines constant excitatory
input with synchronized inhibitory GABAA-type input (dark gray).
ARGS combines random AMPA input with
synchronized GABAA input (black). A, Voltage response and
corresponding spike raster plots to six stimulus presentations from one DCN
neuron. B-E, Same analyses as shown in
Figure 5, but for the stimulus
set including random instead of synchronized AMPA inputs (n = 9
neurons recorded).
|
|

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7. Effect of NMDA voltage dependence on spike rate and spike timing precision.
7.1, Comparison of voltage-independent and exclusively
voltage-modulated excitatory input in the presence of synchronous inhibitory
inputs (n = 25 neurons). 7.2, Comparison of
voltage-independent and exclusively voltage-modulated excitatory input in the
presence of random inhibitory inputs (n = 10 neurons). 7.3,
Comparison of voltage-dependent and independent synchronous excitatory input
in the presence of constant inhibitory inputs (n = 9 neurons). The
analysis is identical to that used in previous figures, except that STAs of
the membrane potential have been added in subpanels C and D.
In subpanels C, the analysis was restricted to spikes that occurred
both in the presence and absence of NMDA voltage dependence, whereas in
subpanels D, the STAs were calculated from spikes that occurred only
in the presence of NMDA voltage dependence. The black lines in D show
the STAs for the voltage-dependent input, whereas the gray lines show the
cross-stimulus STAs for the voltage-independent input. Because the temporal
pattern of inputs was identical in both conditions, the cross-stimulus STA
shows the subthreshold trajectory for input events that triggered spikes in
the voltage-dependent but not the voltage-independent stimulus. The STAs of
Gin shown in subpanels E were calculated from the
same spikes as the STAs in subpanels C (solid lines) and from the
same spikes as the STAs in subpanels D (dotted lines). The STAs of
Gex shown in subpanels F were calculated from the
same spikes as the STAs in subpanels D (solid lines). The calculation
of STAs was restricted to spikes with a minimum preceding ISI of 50 msec to
avoid contamination of the prespike depolarization with preceding spikes in
single trials.
|
|
The inhibitory input sequences from putative in vivo Purkinje cell
activity were constructed as in our preceding study
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
).
Unitary conductances had a rise time of 0.93 msec and a decay time of 13.6
msec (Anchisi et al., 1998
). A
set of 400 such GABAA-type input elements were activated randomly
at a mean firing rate of 35 Hz, and the conductances were summed to generate
Gin. We restricted the present analysis to the unitary
conductance amplitude of 69 pS for inhibitory inputs, which is identical to
the gain factor 16 in our previous study, i.e., resulting in an average mean
level of 16 nS of inhibitory conductance. The 400 input elements were either
activated in 100 independently spiking groups or in only 10 independently
active input groups, duplicating our previously used conditions of
intermediate and high input synchronization in the inhibitory pathway
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
). We
discarded our previously used additional conditions of 400 independent input
groups and unitary amplitudes of <69 pS, because we found these to result
in regular or slow firing DCN patterns uncharacteristic of in vivo
recordings. Purkinje cell synapses in the DCN are likely to be significantly
depressed because of short-term plasticity when the ongoing input rate is high
(Telgkamp and Raman, 2002
;
Pedroarena and Schwarz, 2003
),
however, the synaptic amplitudes we use are still at the low end of the
spectrum of synaptic amplitudes shown in the same studies. We did not include
short-term plasticity in the present study because we limited our analysis to
ongoing fast input activity characteristic of Purkinje cell firing in
vivo, which would lead to a near constant level of such depression. The
present study also excluded the examination of transient increases and
decreases in input activity because the parameter space of such possible
changes is nearly unlimited and is beyond the scope of the basic interactions
between excitation and inhibition examined here.
In our previous study we found that a constant baseline of excitation of 12
nS conductance was required in conjunction with our applied inhibitory inputs
so that realistic spike frequencies could be achieved. In the present study we
replaced the time invariant excitation with realistic patterns of excitatory
input, however, we kept a mean level of 12 nS of excitatory conductance for
all stimuli used. By keeping the mean conductance level constant, we could
exclude that shifts in the balance of excitation and inhibition interfered
with our determination of AMPA and NMDA conductance effects on spike control.
The main effect of shifting the balance of excitation and inhibition was
examined in our previous study (Gauck and
Jaeger, 2000
), and consisted of a change in output spike rate
without altering the effects of input synchronicity and total conductance
amplitude on output spiking. Realistic excitatory input to DCN neurons is
composed of an AMPA component, a fast NMDA component, and a slow NMDA
component (Anchisi et al.,
2001
), and is provided by collaterals of mossy fibers and climbing
fibers that also innervate cerebellar cortex
(Sugihara et al., 1999
;
Wu et al., 1999
;
Shinoda et al., 2000
). The
total number of excitatory synapses on DCN neurons is
2000
(Palkovits et al., 1977
) and
represents an upper estimate for the number of mossy and climbing fibers
converging on a single neuron because each input fiber may make multiple
contacts on a DCN neuron. We used 100 excitatory inputs, which corresponds to
a convergence factor of 20 synapses per incoming axon. No experimental data
exist on this convergence factor, but we found that a larger number of
independently firing inputs approximates the condition of a time-invariant
conductance. The mean activation rate of excitatory inputs was set to 20 Hz in
accordance with in vivo recordings
(Eccles et al., 1972
;
Cazin et al., 1980
;
van Kan et al., 1993
;
Gamlin and Clarke, 1995
;
Matsuzaki and Kyuhou, 1997
).
No difference between mossy and climbing fiber inputs has been described in
the DCN, and we simulate only one homogenous group of excitatory inputs. The
AMPA, fast NMDA, and slow NMDA components of each excitatory input were
calculated according to Equation 3: Gex(t) =
[GAMPA(t) +
GfastNMDA(t) ·
ffast(Vm) +
GslowNMDA(t) ·
fslow(Vm)]. The voltage dependencies
of the NMDA components (Fig. 1
B) were simulated by multiplication of the corresponding
conductance traces with the factor f, described by Equation 4:
f (Vm) = 1/[1 +
P1*exp(-P2 * Vm)]. As
described above for Gex and Gin, this
factor was updated on-line during recording at a rate of 10 kHz. The
parameters of AMPA and NMDA inputs were set to match the data of Anchisi et
al. (2001
). The best fit to the
reported voltage dependencies of the NMDA current
(Anchisi et al., 2001
) was
achieved by setting the parameters P1 and P2 to 0.002 and 0.109 for the fast
NMDA component and to 0.25 and 0.057 for the slow NMDA component. The rise and
decay time constants were 0.5 and 7.1 msec for AMPA, 5 and 20.2 msec for fast
NMDA, and 5 and 136.4 msec for slow NMDA
(Fig. 1 A). The fast
unitary NMDA conductance had a peak value of 57% of the AMPA peak, and the
slow unitary NMDA conductance had a peak value of 28% of the AMPA peak at -60
mV (Fig. 1 A). Thus,
the sum of the fast and slow unitary NMDA conductances had a peak value of
83.2% that of the AMPA peak at -60 mV (Fig.
1 A). The unitary peak conductance amplitude of the AMPA
conductance was set to 39 pS to generate the desired 12 nS average excitatory
conductance. In the presence of voltage-dependent NMDA conductance, the actual
average excitatory conductance is a function of the membrane potential
trajectory. Thus, to compute a stimulus with an expected average excitatory
conductance of 12 nS, we used -40 mV as the assumed membrane potential, which
was the average combined reversal potential of excitation and inhibition of
our stimuli when the NMDA conductance was voltage-independent. We previously
showed that the actual mean Vm is very close to this
average combined reversal potential because of the shunting effects of ongoing
input conductances (Gauck and Jaeger,
2000
). The time course of unitary excitatory and inhibitory input
conductances was taken from experimental data obtained at a temperature of
25°C (Anchisi et al., 1998
,
2001
) and might therefore
underestimate their speed at physiological temperatures in vivo.
However, elevated temperature will shorten the kinetics of excitatory and
inhibitory inputs by a similar factor, and therefore the relative synchrony of
the input pathways will not be affected.
In our previous study we found that input synchronization has a large
effect on spike rate and spike timing
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
).
Therefore we focused the present investigation on how varying amounts of input
synchronization in the excitatory and inhibitory input pathways would
determine the output spike pattern. Furthermore, we aimed at isolating the
contribution of AMPA and NMDA conductances in the effect of excitation on
spiking. To achieve these distinctions we constructed stimuli, which included
either random or synchronized excitatory or inhibitory inputs. To isolate the
effect of temporal information in either the excitatory or inhibitory input
pathway alone, an additional condition was introduced, in which the other
pathway was replaced with a time invariant input conductance. For random input
patterns we activated all 100 inputs (inhibition or excitation) independently
with the specified mean rates. For a synchronized input, we coupled groups of
10 inputs to the same time series of presynaptic activation. To examine the
contribution of NMDA conductances to output spiking, we constructed stimuli
with the same time series of activation but a complete replacement of NMDA
conductance with a larger unitary AMPA conductance (691 pS). The role of the
voltage dependence of the NMDA conductances was further dissected by comparing
the voltage-dependent form described above with a voltage-independent form, in
which a constant Vm of -40 mV was used to update the
factors ffast(Vm) and
fslow(Vm) (Eq. 4), resulting in an
average total excitatory conductance of 12 nS (see above). By this scaling
procedure, the average total (Gex,av) and the unitary peak
(gex,peak) amplitudes of the voltage-dependent and the
voltage-independent excitatory inputs were set to identical values for the
reference potential of -40 mV. Consequently, the voltage-dependent input
(Gex,av or gex,peak) was smaller than
its voltage-independent counterpart for voltages less than -40 mV, whereas it
was larger for voltages more than -40 mV. The reference potential of -40 mV
was chosen because it is very close to the average membrane potential during
the presentation of our stimuli.
Unfortunately the total input conductances impinging onto DCN neurons
in vivo have not been determined experimentally. Our simulated input
patterns are more likely to underestimate than to overestimate total
conductance levels, because only 100 inputs of excitation and inhibition were
used, which is below the numbers of synapses found in anatomically estimates
(Palkovits et al., 1977
). In
addition, our unitary conductance amplitudes were also at the low end of
expected values estimates (Telgkamp and
Raman, 2002
; Pedroarena and
Schwarz, 2003
). On the other hand, we did not simulate synaptic
failures, dendritic attenuation, or short-term depression. For these reasons
we cannot claim to construct fully natural input patterns, for which data
simply do not exist. None of our analyses, however, are dependent on specific
choices of absolute input levels or temporal input patterns. Our input
conditions chosen should instead be considered as a general case of continuous
fluctuating input conductances (see Discussion).
Data analysis. All dynamic current-clamp stimuli had a duration of
10 sec. To exclude onset transients of the stimulation, the first 0.5 sec were
excluded from data analysis. Different stimuli were presented in a
pseudorandom sequence, which was repeated 2-6 times. Two successive stimuli
were separated by a pause of 1 sec during which no current was injected. The
evaluated parameters were the mean spike frequency and the mean spike timing
precision, following our previous study
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
). To
evaluate the spike timing precision, a time window of ±5 msec was
defined for each spike, and it was determined how many spikes elicited by
repeated stimulus presentations fell into this time window. Averaging this
value over all spikes and normalizing it by the number of stimulus repetitions
resulted in the percentage of spikes accurately controlled by the input within
a time window of ±5 msec. The chance level of such coincident firing
across trials was calculated by using the same algorithm after shuffling the
interspike intervals within a trial, and the overall level of
stimulus-controlled precise firing was computed by subtracting this expected
chance level. To separate the influence of temporal transients in the
excitatory and inhibitory input pathways, we compared spike rates and spike
precision values for stimuli, in which either excitatory or inhibitory input
conductance were held constant or were modulated at the same time
(Fig. 2).

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. Stimulus design of the experiments presented in Figures
3,
4,
5,
6. To separate the influences
of excitatory versus inhibitory inputs on the spiking activity of DCN neurons,
three stimuli were required in each experiment. A, To isolate the
influence of temporal fluctuations caused by synchronously active excitatory
input elements, a constant inhibitory conductance
(ASGC) was used. B,
Accordingly, a constant excitatory conductance was used to isolate the
influence of synchronously active inhibitory inputs
(ACGS). C, In a third
stimulus, the excitatory and inhibitory conductance traces were both
amplitude-modulated according to the activity of the corresponding input
pathway (ASGS). By comparing the
resulting spiking pattern of this stimulus to the responses resulting from
A and B, we could separate the influence of each input
pathway on spiking even in the mixed input condition.
|
|
 |
Results
|
|---|
The presented data were recorded from 25 DCN neurons with soma sizes
ranging from 15 to 30 µm. The soma sizes indicate that the recorded neurons
belong to the group of excitatory projection neurons
(Batini et al., 1992
). Their
spontaneous firing frequency ranged from 0 to 8 Hz.
The control of spiking by a mixed baseline of excitatory and
inhibitory inputs
During in vivo activity, DCN neurons will receive ongoing inputs
from excitatory collaterals of mossy and climbing fibers and from inhibitory
Purkinje cell synapses. We have previously determined using in vitro
dynamic current clamping that an ongoing balance of inhibition and excitation
is needed to drive DCN neurons at realistic spike frequencies
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
). Here
we ask the question of how the temporal modulation of excitatory and
inhibitory input is likely to contribute to the control of output spiking.
In a first stimulus set, we used synchronized excitatory AMPA and NMDA
(ANs) and synchronized inhibitory GABAA
(Gs) inputs, each consisting of 10 groups of coactivated
sets of synapses (see Materials and Methods). To isolate the contribution of
temporal information in each pathway we added stimuli, in which either
excitation or inhibition was time-invariant, i.e., constant
(ANc or Gc)
(Fig. 2). The spike response of
a typical cell for a short time segment of these stimuli is shown in
Figure 3A. The spike
rasters show that spike timing was highly conserved for repeated stimulus
presentations within each input pattern, indicating that temporal modulation
in either inhibition or excitation can control spiking precisely. When both
excitation and inhibition contain an identical level of temporal modulation
(i.e., 10 sets of synchronized synapses), the spike pattern much resembles
that of inhibitory input alone. Thus, time-variant inhibitory input dominates
over time-variant excitatory input under these conditions. This result is
quantified in Figure
3C for a set of 25 recorded DCN neurons. The data of the
sample neuron shown in Figure
3A are also indicated for comparison (black boxes). The
frequency of spiking when only excitation is time-variant is much reduced
compared with the other input conditions
(Fig. 3B), although
the average input conductances Gex and
Gin are identical. In addition, the precise spike timing
was primarily controlled by fluctuations in inhibition and not excitation,
because all input conditions sharing synchronous inhibition resulted in
similar spike timing regardless of the presence or absence of synchronous
excitation. In Figure
3C and the following figures we identify the contribution
of inhibition and excitation to the control of spike timing by analyzing spike
timing across repeated stimulus presentations that are either fully identical
(e.g., ANsGs) or are identical only in
excitation (e.g., ANsGs vs
ANsGc denoted by XAN) or inhibition
(ANsGs vs
ANcGs denoted by XG). This analysis
shows that the spike timing across the
ANsGs and
ANcGs conditions with different
excitation but identical inhibition (i.e., XG) was mostly identical
(Fig. 3C). To further
analyze the input events responsible for spike generation the spike triggered
averages (STA) of the excitatory and inhibitory conductances
(Gex, Gin) were calculated
(Fig. 3D,E). The STA
of Gex started to rise
20 msec before the peak of an
action potential when Gin was constant
(Fig. 3D,E, solid
light gray). When both input streams had synchronized input patterns, the STA
of Gex had a shorter time course and was reduced in
amplitude (Fig. 3D,
solid black). The STA of Gex was actually very similar to
this shape when excitation was exclusively voltage-modulated
(Fig. 3D, solid dark
gray). In this case, the modulation of Gex before spiking
is entirely attributable to the voltage-dependent increase of
GNMDA caused by membrane depolarization preceding a spike.
A voltage-independent form of Gex was computed for the
same excitatory input patterns by assuming a constant feedback membrane
potential of -40 mV. The STA of this voltage-independent
Gex was flat for a constant excitatory conductance, of
course (Fig. 3D,
dashed dark gray). It was also nearly flat when input modulation was present
for both excitation and inhibition (Fig.
3D, dashed black), indicating that in this condition
excitation contributes little to the control of spike timing. The STA of
inhibitory inputs confirms the dominance of inhibition over excitation,
because the average decrease of inhibitory input before spiking is
near-identical in the presence or absence of excitatory input modulation
(Fig. 3E). The shape
of the STA of Gin indicates that a decrease of inhibitory
inputs in a short time window of 10-20 msec reliably triggers spikes, as
previously documented (Gauck and Jaeger,
2000
).
The role of input synchronization in controlling output spiking
To examine whether the dominance of inhibition in the control of DCN
spiking was dependent on the amount of synchronization present in the
inhibitory pathway, we constructed a second stimulus set, in which all
inhibitory inputs were firing randomly (Gr). All other
stimulus properties remained identical to the conditions described above. In
response to this reduction in temporal modulation of inhibition pathways,
synchronized excitation was now able to dominate in the control of spiking
(Fig. 4). Again, the precision
of spike timing was high in response to all stimuli, but now the spike
patterns across conditions were very similar when the excitation remained
highly modulated but inhibition differed
(Fig. 4C, XAN). In
contrast, identical random inhibition but different excitatory input led to
completely different spike patterns (Fig.
4C, XG). Furthermore, now the spike frequency was low for
all stimulus conditions (Fig.
4B), indicating that they contained few temporal
fluctuations capable of triggering spikes
(Fig. 1C,D). The STAs
of Gex were almost identical for the stimuli that had
synchronized excitation in common (Fig.
4D: ANsGc = light
gray, ANsGr = black). In contrast, the
amplitude of the STA of Gr was substantially lowered in
the presence of synchronized excitation
(Fig. 4E:
ANsGr = black,
ANcGr = dark gray). Nevertheless, it
should be noted that random inhibition still made a significant contribution
to spike timing in the presence of synchronous excitation
(Fig. 4), whereas synchronized
excitation had almost no influence in the presence of synchronized inhibition
(Fig. 3).
Overall, these data show how the relative influence that excitatory versus
inhibitory inputs exerted on spike initiation depends on their synchronization
level in DCN neurons. Although the level of synchronization was held constant
in our experiments within a particular stimulus, the synchronization could
change on short time scales in vivo, whereby the control on spike
generation could be shifted from inhibitory to excitatory inputs or vice
versa. With respect to synaptic integration in DCN neurons, however, it might
be of particular interest that the predominant influence on spike generation
was exerted by inhibition for identical synchronization levels of excitation
and inhibition, which is likely to allow the cerebellar cortex to exert a
privileged level of control over DCN spiking.
The role of the NMDA conductance in synaptic integration
One possibility that synaptic integration in the DCN favors inhibition is
given by the large component of NMDA conductance, which, because of its slow
time course, tends to smooth out the effect of temporal modulation in the
excitatory input (Harsch and Robinson,
2000
). To determine the contribution of this effect to the
observed results, we constructed additional stimulus sets, in which the NMDA
component of excitatory input conductance was replaced by increasing the
unitary AMPA conductance to 691 pS. This increase resulted in maintaining the
same average amplitude of Gex of 12 nS for all stimulus
patterns.
First, we compared how synchronized excitatory and inhibitory inputs
compete in the control of spiking when only AMPA conductance was present in
the excitation (As). In contrast to the condition of mixed
AMPA and NMDA components, excitation now dominated in the generation of action
potentials (Fig. 5). The spike
pattern was highly similar for responses to stimuli with synchronous
excitation in the presence or absence of synchronous inhibition
(AsGs vs
AsGc) but was quite different when the
synchronous excitation was removed
(AsGs vs
AcGs). The dominant effect of
excitation was confirmed by the comparison of spike timing precision within
and across conditions (Fig.
5C). The impact of synchronized excitation was only
slightly reduced by synchronized inhibition when compared with constant
inhibition. In contrast, the impact of synchronized inhibition was strongly
reduced by synchronized excitation (Fig.
5C). Furthermore, the STA of Gex was
almost identical in the absence or presence of synchronized inhibition
(Fig. 5D), and the
peak amplitude of the STA of Gin was strongly reduced
compared with the case of mixed AMPA-NMDA excitation
(Fig. 3E). These
effects are likely because of the much-enhanced amplitude of transients in the
Gex waveform in the absence of NMDA conductance
(Fig. 1C), which also
is likely to account for the overall increase in spike rate, even though the
average level of conductances remained identical.
To test whether AMPA excitation would override inhibitory input patterns
even when excitatory inputs were not synchronized, we constructed the fourth
stimulus set, comparing random AMPA input (Ar) and
synchronized GABAA input (Gs). This
manipulation overall reduced the spike rate considerably (from 12 Hz for
AsGc to 4 Hz for
ArGc), further indicating that
transients caused by input synchronization were required for spike generation,
even though the subthreshold membrane potential was very close to the spike
threshold, and DCN neurons are endowed with persistent inward currents
(Raman et al., 2000
). In
addition, the spike pattern was very similar between the conditions of random
or constant excitation in the presence of synchronized inhibition
(Fig. 6). Therefore, the spike
generation was now mostly controlled by the GABAA input, and the
roles between excitation and inhibition were reversed compared with the third
stimulus set using synchronized excitation. The dominant influence of the
GABAA input was confirmed by the corresponding spike timing
precision values (Fig.
6C) and the STAs (Fig.
6D,E). The STA of Gs
(Fig. 6E) was only
slightly changed by switching Ar to
Ac, but the STA of Ar
(Fig. 6D) was strongly
reduced by switching from Gc to Gs.
Overall, these results confirm that the presence of a strong NMDA conductance
in DCN neurons allows the inhibitory input of Purkinje cells to attain a more
dominant role in the control of DCN spiking even when the excitation is
strongly modulated by synchronous inputs. In contrast, an AMPA-only excitatory
input dominates over inhibition, unless the temporal fluctuations in the
inhibitory input significantly exceed those of the excitation.
The role of the NMDA voltage dependence in synaptic integration
Beyond the slower time course of NMDA compared with AMPA conductances that
can account for the de-emphasis of excitatory input transients as demonstrated
above, a key feature of the NMDA conductance is its voltage dependence.
Although DCN neurons show only a weakly voltage-dependent NMDA conductance in
comparison with other cell types (Anchisi
et al., 2001
), the NMDA current is still much reduced when the
membrane potential is hyperpolarized (Fig.
1). In the recordings presented so far, the NMDA component was
always voltage-dependent. To examine the functional significance of this
voltage dependence, we constructed additional stimulus sets, in which stimuli
with and without voltage dependence in the NMDA conductance were compared.
First, we used an excitatory conductance (Gex) that had a
voltage-dependent or independent NMDA component in the presence of
synchronized inhibition. To isolate the effects of the NMDA voltage
dependence, we used an excitatory conductance that was constant at any given
voltage, i.e., was not constructed by summing unitary physiological synaptic
inputs (Fig. 1A,C,D).
Nevertheless the voltage dependence of its NMDA component gave rise to
amplitude fluctuations of Gex as soon as
Vm changed. Therefore we refer to this input as
"exclusively voltage-modulated" in the following. Using the same
conductance trace but with a fixed Vm of -40 mV in
Equation 4 (see Materials and Methods) resulted in the voltage-independent
Gex with a constant conductance of 12 nS. Comparing the
responses to both stimuli, we isolated the effect of the voltage dependence of
the NMDA component. Based on the stimulus construction method to keep the
average excitatory conductance at 12 nS (see Materials and Methods), the
exclusively voltage-modulated NMDA conductance was identical to the
voltage-independent constant conductance at -40 mV, whereas it was higher or
lower for values of Vm more depolarized or more
hyperpolarized than -40 mV, respectively. The membrane potential was more
hyperpolarized with the exclusively voltage-modulated NMDA conductance during
periods of hyperpolarization (Fig.
7.1A). Because the excitatory conductance was constant
over time for the voltage-independent NMDA input in this stimulus, all spikes
were induced by temporary decreases in inhibition
(Fig. 7.1E,F, gray
traces). This was also true for the voltage-dependent NMDA input, but in
addition, the depolarization caused by decreases in inhibition led to an
increase in NMDA conductance because of its voltage dependence
(Fig. 7.1E,F, black
traces). This was accompanied by an increase in spiking during periods of
depolarization compared with voltage-independent NMDA conductance
(Fig. 7.1A). Thus,
NMDA voltage dependence boosted spike initiation much like expected from a
persistent depolarization-activated inward conductance. The overall spike rate
was increased by the NMDA voltage dependence, and the spike timing precision
was not changed (Fig.
7.1B). The effect of the NMDA voltage dependence was even
more pronounced when the inhibitory inputs contained only smaller temporal
transients (Fig. 7.1E,
7.2E, compare black and gray lines), i.e., all 100
inhibitory inputs were activated at random
(Fig. 7.2). In this case the
spike rate more than doubled from 1.7 to 5.6 Hz in the presence of exclusively
voltage-modulated NMDA input compared with a constant conductance, and the
precise spike timing that was lost for the constant conductance was recovered
(Fig. 7.2B). Of
course, the NMDA conductance is usually modulated by temporal patterns in the
excitatory input, and therefore we also investigated the effect of voltage
dependence in our synchronous excitatory input condition when the inhibition
was constant (Fig. 7.3). This
stimulus was again designed such that voltage-dependent and independent NMDA
conductances resulted in the same conductance waveforms for the reference
potential of -40 mV. In the presence of synchronized excitatory input, loss of
the NMDA voltage dependence led to a decrease in spike frequency as well as
spike precision (compare Figs.
3,
7.3B). Again, NMDA
voltage dependence was boosting the excitatory conductance preceding each
spike (Fig. 7.3F)
because of the increasing NMDA conductance as the cell depolarized toward
spike threshold.
We further analyzed the data comparing voltage-dependent and
voltage-independent NMDA conductances to elucidate the mechanisms underlying
the response boosting by NMDA voltage dependence. From the stimulus
construction alone, it was clear that a depolarization of more than -40 mV
would lead to a larger NMDA conductance for the voltage-dependent forms. The
functional significance for this depolarization-dependent increase in NMDA
conductance is clear from the spike-triggered averages
(Fig. 7.1C-F, 7.2C-F,
7.3C-F) because the presence of NMDA voltage dependence
led to a larger increase of Gex before spike threshold was
reached (Fig.
7.1F,7.2F,7.3F). Accordingly, extra
spikes were generated on average by an additional membrane depolarization of
4 mV that started to develop only
5-10 msec before spike generation
(Fig.
7.1D,7.2D,7.3D, thin black traces).
Therefore, less pronounced depolarizing inputs
(Fig. 7.1E,
7.2E, dotted lines, 7.3F, gray line) were
enabled to trigger action potentials by the voltage dependence of the NMDA
input. Spikes that were already triggered by input transients in the
voltage-independent NMDA condition generally were triggered 1-2 msec earlier
in the voltage-dependent condition, as demonstrated by a cross-correlation
analysis (data not shown). These findings were common regardless of whether
temporal fluctuations of inhibition or excitation dominated, indicating that a
common role of NMDA voltage dependence consists of boosting the spike response
to input conditions that cause depolarization. Given the DCN circuitry, this
signifies that the effect of pauses in Purkinje cell spiking is enhanced by
the presence of a baseline of NMDA conductance because of ongoing excitatory
input from mossy and climbing fiber collaterals. A second possible
contribution to response boosting by NMDA voltage dependence could originate
from a deinactivation of sodium channels during periods of hyperpolarization
preceding spiking, which were enhanced in the presence of NMDA voltage
dependence. The membrane potential at which spikes were triggered was not
lowered in the presence of voltage-dependent NMDA conductance, however, as
shown by the identical inflection points of STA waveforms of
Vm in Figures
7.1C, 7.2C, and 7.3C. Thus, the spike
threshold remained constant, which could be caused by an insufficient amount
of additional hyperpolarization with voltage-dependent NMDA conductance to
increase Na channel deinactivation or to a compensatory deinactivation of K
channels.
 |
Discussion
|
|---|
Purkinje cells and mossy fibers show ongoing activity in vivo
(Eccles et al., 1971
;
Cazin et al., 1980
;
Savio and Tempia, 1985
;
Stratton et al., 1988
;
van Kan et al., 1993
;
Gamlin and Clarke, 1995
;
Matsuzaki and Kyuhou, 1997
).
To examine the control of DCN spiking by such an input condition, we used
dynamic clamping in vitro to allow complete control over complex
input patterns. Based on our previous findings that temporal modulation of
inhibitory inputs is very important in triggering spiking
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
), we
examined how temporal modulation of excitation and inhibition may interact. We
found that because of the large and slow NMDA conductance in the excitatory
input of DCN neurons (Anchisi et al.,
2001
), inhibitory input patterns dominated in the control of spike
timing. This condition could be reversed, when the temporal modulation in the
inhibitory pathway was much less pronounced than that in the excitation. In
addition, we found that the voltage dependence of NMDA conductance played a
significant role in enhancing spike responses to depolarizing input
transients. Such transients were caused either by transient reductions in
inhibitory input or by increases in excitatory input.
One important question is whether our findings are relevant for all likely
activity patterns in vivo and are not restricted to our somewhat
arbitrary manipulation of input patterns consisting of switching between
random input and completely synchronized sets of input fibers. We believe that
this is the case for the following reasons. First, the range of input
conductance waveforms that we tested by using different synchronization levels
(Fig. 1) contained a broad
spectrum of time courses and amplitude transients that likely encompass many
conductance waveforms that would also result from other input conditions.
Second, the use of highly synchronized input conditions is indicated by a
number of publications that point toward possible mechanisms (see Functional
considerations below) for the synchronization of Purkinje cell activity
(Bower and Woolston, 1983
;
Pichitpornchai et al., 1994
;
Cohen and Yarom, 1998
;
Gundappa-Sulur et al., 1999
;
Lang et al., 1999
;
Vos et al., 1999
; Mann-Metzer
and Yarom, 1999
,
2000
). Third, we prefer our
construction of input patterns based on summing unitary EPSCs and IPSCs to
subjecting neurons to white noise stimuli, because white noise will contain
many features not attainable by synaptic conductances and will under-represent
the most common conductance patterns following synaptic inputs. To restrict
the input conditions to a manageable number, we decided to omit any specific
correlations between excitatory and inhibitory inputs. The space of possible
such correlations is extremely large and is ill constrained by experimental
data. In the many random conditions of combined excitatory and inhibitory
transients in our inputs, we found no evidence for very specific conjunctions
needed to control spiking. Rather, spikes were favored generally by any
combination of reduced inhibition and increased excitation. For both input
streams, individual spikes generally showed a dependence on the preceding
waveforms for 10-20 msec. This specific temporal window of synaptic
integration is likely shaped by the active properties of DCN neurons. A recent
publication indicates for example that the Hodgkin-Huxley properties of sodium
channels might be sufficient to shift the sensitivity of pyramidal neurons
dynamically from slower to faster depolarizing input transients depending on
the level of input activity (Azouz and
Gray, 2003
). The temporal window of synaptic integration preceding
spike generation is overall likely to be caused by the precise kinetics of all
voltage-gated channels present. A pharmacological dissection of the
involvement of particular ionic currents was beyond the scope of the present
study, however.
The response to cerebellar cortical input in the DCN
Based on our results, we propose that DCN spiking is controlled in two
ways. First, the relative balance of excitation and inhibition over an
extended period of time is important in setting up an average spike frequency
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
).
Second, temporal transients in the inputs caused by presynaptic
synchronization in activity are very important in allowing spikes to be
triggered at specific times. In fact, when input conductances are completely
constant, even a strong excitatory baseline is unlikely to trigger spikes
because of the voltage-clamping effect exerted by synaptic conductances
(Gauck and Jaeger, 2000
),
casting doubt on the relevance of pure rate coding for DCN neurons. In the
present study we find that DCN neurons are selective to respond strongly to
transients in inhibitory inputs, because excitatory transients are dampened by
slow NMDA conductances. The most effective inhibitory transients were brief
pauses in inhibitory input, which caused immediate spike responses, as seen by
the method of spike-triggered averaging. Spike-triggered averages showed no
evidence of spikes after pronounced increases of inhibition, as would be the
case with post-hyperpolarization rebound spiking. Rebound spiking, which has
been observed in DCN neurons after strong inhibitory transients in
vitro in the absence of ongoing excitation
(Aizenman and Linden, 1999
),
thus played no role in input processing under our input conditions of a
continuous balance of excitation and inhibition. Concepts about
synchronization-based information processing have been suggested for the
cerebral cortex (Abeles, 1991
;
Diesmann et al., 1999
;
Singer, 1999
;
Gray, 1999
), but have focused
on excitatory input transients. The basic idea is that cerebral cortical
neurons respond selectively to incoming pulse packets of synchronized
excitation. The present study indicates that such a mechanism would not
necessarily be limited to excitatory inputs, because reductions in inhibitory
input create similar input transients in the presence of an excitatory
conductance baseline. Interestingly, a depolarization caused by a reduction in
conductance is somewhat better suited to trigger a spike than the same
depolarization triggered by excitation, because the shunting force of the
input conductance is reduced, allowing an easier spike escape caused by
voltage-gated currents. Nevertheless, we found that strong excitatory
transients could reliably trigger spikes in DCN neurons, even though the
excitatory conductance was smoothed out by the large NMDA component.
The role of the NMDA voltage dependence
The voltage-dependent magnesium block of the NMDA input to DCN neurons is
rather weak compared with that found in many other neuron types
(Kuner and Schoepfer, 1996
),
suggesting that it might be of secondary functional significance. To study the
contribution of the voltage dependence of the NMDA input to the activity
control of DCN neurons, we compared their responses to voltage-dependent and
voltage-independent stimuli. The results showed that the spike frequency as
well as the spike timing precision were increased by the voltage dependence of
the NMDA input. An increase in the spike timing precision was especially large
for inhibitory input with a low level of synchronization. This indicates that
the presence of the large voltage-dependent NMDA component facilitates the
impact that GABAA type input can exert on the activity of DCN
neurons. Furthermore, the timing of spikes triggered by transient reductions
in inhibitory input was almost identical with voltage-independent or
voltage-dependent NMDA input, indicating that NMDA enhancement of responses
did not impair the fidelity of these responses. Overall, the large weakly
voltage-dependent NMDA component of the excitatory input conductance in DCN
neurons is thus well suited to enhance DCN spiking caused by decreases in
inhibition but not to override the effect of increases in inhibitory input.
Although we did not directly test the effect that strongly voltage-dependent
NMDA conductances would have in this situation, it seems likely that because
of the large NMDA input component, this could lead to a full bistability of
DCN neurons and NMDA-induced bursting independent of inhibitory inputs. It is
possible that the weak voltage dependence developed to disallow such escapes
from cerebellar cortical inhibitory input.
Functional considerations
Taken together our data indicate that excitatory as well as inhibitory
inputs can determine the spiking activity of DCN neurons, depending on the
presence and strength of rapid fluctuations in the respective input pathway.
Given similar levels of fluctuations in both input pathways, the inhibition
had privileged control over spike initiation, however. Because of the high
convergence of many Purkinje cells onto a single DCN neuron
(Palkovits et al., 1977
), a
population of Purkinje cells is likely required to show correlated transients
in activity for DCN neurons to respond. There are several lines of evidence
supporting the notion that populations of Purkinje cells might contain strong
correlated transients in activity. First, climbing fiber inputs can be
synchronized among large numbers of Purkinje cells, and in turn synchronize
Purkinje cell complex spiking (Lang et
al., 1999
). Mossy fiber input could synchronize Purkinje cell
activity via their highly branched projection to multiple areas of granule
cells and activating ascending granule cell axons, which have a strong
influence on overlying Purkinje cells
(Bower and Woolston, 1983
;
Pichitpornchai et al., 1994
;
Cohen and Yarom, 1998
;
Gundappa-Sulur et al., 1999
).
Furthermore, not only excitatory but also inhibitory input could synchronize
the activity between Purkinje cells
(Jaeger et al., 1997
;
Jaeger and Bower, 1999
). In
this respect it is interesting to note that the activity of inhibitory
interneurons of the cerebellar cortex has been reported to be synchronized by
parallel fiber activity (Vos et al.,
1999
) and gap junctions (Mann-Metzer and Yarom,
1999
,
2000
). The possibility that
strong sensory inputs via the mossy fiber and climbing fiber systems may
trigger direct excitatory responses in the DCN is also supported by the
present study. Our results suggest that it would be particularly fruitful to
monitor large numbers of Purkinje cells and DCN neurons in awake behaving
animals with multiwire designs to further elucidate network activity during
the control of behavior.
 |
Footnotes
|
|---|
Received March 10, 2003;
revised July 7, 2003;
accepted July 7, 2003.
This work was supported by a grant from the Federal Ministry of Education
and Research (Fö: 01KS9602) and the Interdisciplinary Center of Clinical
Research Tübingen (to V.G.) and by National Institute of Mental Health
Grant R29 MH57256 (to D.J.).
Correspondence should be addressed to Volker Gauck, Department of Cognitive
Neurology, University Tuebingen, Auf der Morgenstelle 15, 72076 Tuebingen,
Germany. E-mail:
volker.gauck{at}uni-tuebingen.de.
Copyright © 2003 Society for Neuroscience
0270-6474/03/238109-10$15.00/0
 |
References
|
|---|
Abeles M (1991) Corticonics. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge UP.
Aizenman CD, Linden DJ (1999) Regulation of the
rebound depolarization and spontaneous firing patterns of deep nuclear neurons
in slices of rat cerebellum. J Neurophysiol
82: 1697-1709.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Anchisi D, Scelfo B, Strata P, Tempia F (1998)
Postsynaptic currents in deep cerebellar nuclei. Soc Neurosci
Abstr 24:
325.
Anchisi D, Scelfo B, Tempia F (2001) Postsynaptic
currents in deep cerebellar nuclei. J Neurophysiol
85: 323-331.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Audinat E, Gahwiler BH, Knopfel T (1992) Excitatory
synaptic potentials in neurons of the deep nuclei in olivo-cerebellar slice
cultures. Neuroscience 49:
903-911.[Web of Science][Medline]
Azouz R, Gray CM (2003) Adaptive coincidence detection
and dynamic gain control in visual cortical neurons in vivo.
Neuron 37:
513-523.[Web of Science][Medline]
Batini C, Compoint C, Buisseret-Delmas C, Daniel H, Guegan M
(1992) Cerebellar nuclei and the nucleocortical projections in
the rat: retrograde tracing coupled to GABA and glutamate
immunohistochemistry. J Comp Neurol 315:
74-84.[Web of Science][Medline]
Bower JM, Woolston DC (1983) Congruence of spatial
organization of tactile projections to granule cell and Purkinje cell layers
of cerebellar hemispheres of the albino rat: vertical organization of
cerebellar cortex. J Neurophysiol 49:
745-766.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Cazin L, Precht W, Lannou J (1980) Firing
characteristics of neurons mediating optokinetic responses to rat's vestibular
neurons. Pflügers Arch 386:
221-230.[Web of Science][Medline]
Cohen D, Yarom Y (1998) Patches of synchronized
activity in the cerebellar cortex evoked by mossy-fiber stimulation:
questioning the role of parallel fibers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
95: 15032-15036.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Cull-Candy SG, Brickley SG, Misra C, Feldmeyer D, Momiyama A,
Farrant M (1998) NMDA receptor diversity in the cerebellum:
identification of subunits contribution to functional receptors.
Neuropharmacology 37:
1369-1380.[Web of Science][Medline]
De Zeeuw CI, Berrebi AS (1995) Postsynaptic targets of
Purkinje cell terminals in the cerebellar and vestibular nuclei of the rat.
Eur J Neurosci 7:
2322-2333.[Web of Science][Medline]
Diesmann M, Gewaltig MO, Aertsen A (1999) Stable
propagation of synchronous spiking in cortical neural networks.
Nature 402:
529-533.[Medline]
Eccles JC, Faber DS, Murphy JT, Sabah NH, Taborikova H
(1971) Afferent volleys in limb nerves influencing impulse
discharges in cerebellar cortex. I. In mossy fibers and granule cells.
Exp Brain Res 13:
15-35.
Eccles JC, Sabah NH, Schmidt RF, Taborikova H (1972)
Cutaneous mechanoreceptors influencing impulse discharges in cerebellar
cortex. II. In Purkinje cells by mossy fiber input. Exp Brain
Res 15:
261-277.[Web of Science][Medline]
Gamlin PD, Clarke RJ (1995) Single-unit activity in
the primate nucleus reticularis tegmenti pontis related to vergence and ocular
accommodation. J Neurophysiol 73:
2115-2119.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Gauck V, Jaeger D (2000) The control of rate and
timing of spikes in the deep cerebellar nuclei by inhibition. J
Neurosci 20:
3006-3016.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Gray CM (1999) The temporal correlation hypothesis of
visual feature integration: still alive and well. Neuron
24: 31-47.[Web of Science][Medline]
Gundappa-Sulur G, De Schutter E, Bower JM (1999)
Ascending granule cell axon: an important component of cerebellar cortical
circuitry. J Comp Neurol 408:
580-596.[Web of Science][Medline]
Harsch A, Robinson HP (2000) Postsynaptic variability
of firing in rat cortical neurons: the roles of input synchronization and
synaptic NMDA receptor conductance. J Neurosci
20: 6181-6192.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Jaeger D, Bower JM (1999) Synaptic control of spiking
in cerebellar Purkinje cells: dynamic current clamp based on model
conductances. J Neurosci 19:
12.
Jaeger D, De Schutter E, Bower JM (1997) The role of
synaptic and voltage-gated currents in the control of Purkinje cell spiking: a
modeling study. J Neurosci 17:
91-106.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Kuner T, Schoepfer R (1996) Multiple structural
elements determine subunit specificity of Mg 2+ block in NMDA
receptor channels. J Neurosci 16:
3549-3558.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Lang EJ, Sugihara I, Welsh JP, Llinas R (1999)
Patterns of spontaneous Purkinje cell complex spike activity in the awake rat.
J Neurosci 19:
2728-2739.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Mann-Metzer P, Yarom Y (1999) Electrotonic coupling
interacts with intrinsic properties to generate synchronized activity in
cerebellar networks of inhibitory interneurons. J Neurosci
19: 3298-3306.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Mann-Metzer P, Yarom Y (2000) Electrotonic coupling
synchronizes interneuron activity in the cerebellar cortex. Prog Brain
Res 124:
115-122.[Medline]
Matsuzaki R, Kyuhou S (1997) Pontine neurons which
relay projections from the superior colliculus to the posterior vermis of the
cerebellum in the cat: distribution and visual properties. Neurosci
Lett 236:
99-102.[Web of Science][Medline]
Palkovits M, Mezey E, Hamori J, Szentagothai J (1977)
Quantitative histological analysis of the cerebellar nuclei in the cat. I.
Numerical data on cells and synapses. Exp Brain Res
28: 189-209.[Web of Science][Medline]
Pedroarena CM, Schwarz C (2003) Efficacy and
short-term plasticity at GABAergic synapses between Purkinje cells and
cerebellar nuclei neurons. J Neurophysiol
89: 704-715.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Pichitpornchai C, Rawson JA, Rees S (1994) Morphology
of parallel fibres in the cerebellar cortex of the rat: an experimental light
and electron microscopic study with biocytin. J Comp Neurol
342: 206-220.[Web of Science][Medline]
Raman IM, Gustafson AE, Padgett D (2000) Ionic
currents and spontaneous firing in neurons isolated from the cerebella nuclei.
J Neurosci 20:
9004-9016.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Robinson HP, Kawai N (1993) Injection of digitally
synthesized synaptic conductance transients to measure the integrative
properties of neurons. J Neurosci Methods
49: 157-165.[Web of Science][Medline]
Savio T, Tempia F (1985) On the Purkinje cell activity
increase induced by suppression of inferior olive activity. Exp Brain
Res 57:
456-463.[Web of Science][Medline]
Sharp AA, O'Neil MB, Abbott LF, Marder E (1993)
Dynamic clamp: computer-generated conductances in real neurons. J
Neurophysiol 69:
992-995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Shinoda Y, Sugihara I, Wu HS, Sugiuchi Y (2000) The
entire trajectory of single climbing and mossy fibers in the cerebellar nuclei
and cortex. Prog Brain Res 124:
173-186.[Medline]
Singer W (1999) Time as coding space? Curr Opin
Neurobiol 9:
189-194.[Web of Science][Medline]
Stratton SE, Lorden JF, Mays LE, Oltmans GA (1988)
Spontaneous and harmaline-stimulated Purkinje cell activity in rats with a
genetic movement disorder. J Neurosci 8:
3327-3336.[Abstract]
Sugihara I, Wu H, Shinoda Y (1999) Morphology of
single olivocerebellar axons labeled with biotinylated dextran amine in the
rat. J Comp Neurol 414:
131-148.[Web of Science][Medline]
Sultan F, Czubayko U, Thier P (2003) Morphological
classification of the rat lateral cerebellar nuclear neurons by principal
component analysis. J Comp Neurol 455:
139-155.[Web of Science][Medline]
Telgkamp P, Raman IM (2002) Depression of inhibitory
synaptic transmission between Purkinje cells and neurons of the cerebellar
nuclei. J Neurosci 22:
8447-8457.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
van Kan PL, Gibson AR, Houk JC (1993) Movement-related
inputs to intermediate cerebellum of the monkey. J Neurophysiol
69: 74-94.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Vos BP, Maex R, Volny-Luraghi A, De Schutter E (1999)
Parallel fibers synchronize spontaneous activity in cerebellar Golgi cells.
J Neurosci 19:
RC6.
Wu H-S, Sugihara I, Shinoda Y (1999) Projection
patterns of single mossy fibers originating from the lateral reticular nucleus
in the rat cerebellar cortex and nuclei. J Comp Neurol
411: 97-118.[Web of Science][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Zheng and I. M. Raman
Ca Currents Activated by Spontaneous Firing and Synaptic Disinhibition in Neurons of the Cerebellar Nuclei
J. Neurosci.,
August 5, 2009;
29(31):
9826 - 9838.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. R. Schultz, K. Kitamura, A. Post-Uiterweer, J. Krupic, and M. Hausser
Spatial Pattern Coding of Sensory Information by Climbing Fiber-Evoked Calcium Signals in Networks of Neighboring Cerebellar Purkinje Cells
J. Neurosci.,
June 24, 2009;
29(25):
8005 - 8015.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. E. Street and P. B. Manis
Action Potential Timing Precision in Dorsal Cochlear Nucleus Pyramidal Cells
J Neurophysiol,
June 1, 2007;
97(6):
4162 - 4172.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. N. Blythe, J. F. Atherton, and M. D. Bevan
Synaptic Activation of Dendritic AMPA and NMDA Receptors Generates Transient High-Frequency Firing in Substantia Nigra Dopamine Neurons In Vitro
J Neurophysiol,
April 1, 2007;
97(4):
2837 - 2850.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. M Blazquez, Y. Hirata, and S. M. Highstein
Chronic Changes in Inputs to Dorsal Y Neurons Accompany VOR Motor Learning
J Neurophysiol,
March 1, 2006;
95(3):
1812 - 1825.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. Zsiros and S. Hestrin
Background Synaptic Conductance and Precision of EPSP-Spike Coupling at Pyramidal Cells
J Neurophysiol,
June 1, 2005;
93(6):
3248 - 3256.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. P. Aksenov, N. A. Serdyukova, J. R. Bloedel, and V. Bracha
Glutamate Neurotransmission in the Cerebellar Interposed Nuclei: Involvement in Classically Conditioned Eyeblinks and Neuronal Activity
J Neurophysiol,
January 1, 2005;
93(1):
44 - 52.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|