Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
This Week in The Journal

This Week in The Journal

Journal of Neuroscience 2 March 2011, 31 (9) i
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Embedded Image Cellular/Molecular

Cholinergic Activation Switches LTP to LTD

Yanjun Zhao and Thanos Tzounopoulos

(see pages 3158–3168)

At many synapses, both long-term potentiation (LTP) and depression (LTD) require NMDA receptor activation and calcium influx, but the intracellular signaling pathways underlying potentiation and depression subsequently diverge. The two pathways can be activated simultaneously, and the more robustly activated pathway then determines whether net potentiation or depression occurs. Often, the outcome is determined by the relative timing of presynaptic and postsynaptic spikes: if presynaptic firing precedes postsynaptic firing, LTP is produced, whereas the opposite pattern produces LTD. Neuromodulators can also alter the relative strength of LTP and LTD. Zhao and Tzounopoulos report that although pairing afferent stimulation with subsequent postsynaptic spikes normally produced LTP in mouse dorsal cochlear nucleus neurons, the same stimulation produced LTD when muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) were activated. This likely resulted from mAChR-induced activation of phospholipase C, which increases production of endocannabinoids, which in turn diffuse retrogradely and reduce presynaptic release probability. Blocking cannabinoid receptors unmasked LTP in the presence of mAChR agonists.

Embedded Image Development/Plasticity/Repair

Dar1 Inhibition of Spastin Promotes Dendrite Growth

Bing Ye, Jung Hwan Kim, Limin Yang, Ian McLachlan, Susan Younger, et al.

(see pages 3309–3319)

The functional specialization of axons and dendrites depends in part on their unique structural features: whereas dendrites are relatively wide at the base and taper toward the tip, axons are uniformly narrow throughout. These differences arise during development through selective targeting of proteins that regulate the actin and microtubule cytoskeleton. Differential growth of axons and dendrites is achieved in part by temporal segregation of their development (axons often are established before dendrites), but their growth is also controlled by different transcription factors. Ye et al. found that the Drosophila transcription factor Dar1 is required for growth of dendrites, but not axons, in peripheral neurons. Dar1-deficient embryos had shorter, less branched dendrites than wild-type embryos, and overexpression of Dar1 increased dendritic length and branching. These effects likely resulted from Dar1-dependent inhibition of transcription of spastin, a microtubule-severing protein. Spastin transcript levels were increased in Dar1 mutants, and overexpression of spastin reduced dendritic growth and branching.

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Loss of Dar1 (right) greatly reduces dendritic branching in Drosophila peripheral neurons. See Ye et al. for details.

Embedded Image Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Adds Noise

Dietrich Samuel Schwarzkopf, Juha Silvanto, and Geraint Rees

(see pages 3143–3147)

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) induces current flow that alters neuronal activity in the brain. Exactly how TMS affects neuronal activity is debated, however. TMS is often used to inactivate small areas of cortex during performance of a task, suggesting that TMS suppresses neural communication. But under some circumstances, TMS facilitates performance, leading to the hypothesis that it introduces noise into the neural system. Although excessive noise obscures signals and impairs performance, when signals are just below the detection threshold, a small amount of noise can push those signals above threshold, thus improving detection. This is called stochastic resonance. To test whether TMS produces effects consistent with noise addition, Schwarzkopf et al. delivered different intensities of TMS while subjects performed a motion discrimination task. When discriminability was high, it was reduced by strong TMS. In contrast, when discriminability was low, it was improved by low-intensity TMS, supporting the hypothesis that TMS works by adding noise.

Embedded Image Neurobiology of Disease

Attention Is Impaired in Mouse Model of Alzheimer's Disease

Carola Romberg, Mark P. Mattson, Mohamed R. Mughal, Timothy J. Bussey, and Lisa M. Saksida

(see pages 3500–3507)

Memory loss is the most striking cognitive feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and spatial learning and memory are routinely tested in animal models of AD. Attention is also impaired in AD, however, and attention deficits can impair performance on memory tests. Human attention is often measured with serial reaction time tasks (SRTTs) in which subjects rapidly touch cues as they appear on a screen. Romberg et al. used a similar touchscreen test to study attention in mice. Transgenic mice in which AD-associated proteins were mutated learned to perform the SRTT as well as controls, but when attentional demand was increased by reducing stimulus duration, mutant mice made more errors. Error rate increased over many trials, suggesting that sustained attention was impaired. Attention deficits in AD likely result from disruption of cholinergic pathways, because enhancing cholinergic transmission reduces deficits. Likewise, a cholinesterase inhibitor reduced SRTT errors in mice, indicating that the deficit resulted from decreased cholinergic function.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 31 (9)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 31, Issue 9
2 Mar 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
This Week in The Journal
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
This Week in The Journal
Journal of Neuroscience 2 March 2011, 31 (9) i

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
This Week in The Journal
Journal of Neuroscience 2 March 2011, 31 (9) i
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Cellular/Molecular
    • Development/Plasticity/Repair
    • Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive
    • Neurobiology of Disease
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • This Week in The Journal
  • This Week in The Journal
  • This Week in The Journal
Show more This Week in The Journal
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2023 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.