↓ Skip to main content

Distinct Roles of SOM and VIP Interneurons during Cortical Up States

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neural Circuits, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Distinct Roles of SOM and VIP Interneurons during Cortical Up States
Published in
Frontiers in Neural Circuits, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fncir.2016.00052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Garrett T. Neske, Barry W. Connors

Abstract

During cortical network activity, recurrent synaptic excitation among pyramidal neurons is approximately balanced by synaptic inhibition, which is provided by a vast diversity of inhibitory interneurons. The relative contributions of different interneuron subtypes to inhibitory tone during cortical network activity is not well-understood. We previously showed that many of the major interneuron subtypes in mouse barrel cortex are highly active during Up states (Neske et al., 2015); while fast-spiking (FS), parvalbumin (PV)-positive cells were the most active interneuron subtype, many non-fast-spiking (NFS), PV-negative interneurons were as active or more active than neighboring pyramidal cells. This suggests that the NFS cells could play a role in maintaining or modulating Up states. Here, using optogenetic techniques, we further dissected the functional roles during Up states of two major NFS, PV-negative interneuron subtypes: somatostatin (SOM)-positive cells and vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP)-positive cells. We found that while pyramidal cell excitability during Up states significantly increased when SOM cells were optogenetically silenced, VIP cells did not influence pyramidal cell excitability either upon optogenetic silencing or activation. VIP cells failed to contribute to Up states despite their ability to inhibit SOM cells strongly. We suggest that the contribution of VIP cells to the excitability of pyramidal cells may vary with cortical state.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 149 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 33%
Researcher 26 17%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Master 15 10%
Student > Postgraduate 10 6%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 22 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 68 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 24%
Psychology 6 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 3%
Engineering 2 1%
Other 9 6%
Unknown 28 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 December 2016.
All research outputs
#16,476,587
of 26,450,025 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#663
of 1,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,724
of 384,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#15
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,450,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 384,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.