↓ Skip to main content

Pacing Hippocampal Sharp-Wave Ripples With Weak Electric Stimulation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Pacing Hippocampal Sharp-Wave Ripples With Weak Electric Stimulation
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00164
Pubmed ID
Authors

Huiyi Jiang, Shicheng Liu, Xinling Geng, Adam Caccavano, Katherine Conant, Stefano Vicini, Jianyoung Wu

Abstract

Sharp-wave ripples (SWRs) are spontaneous neuronal population events that occur in the hippocampus during sleep and quiet restfulness, and are thought to play a critical role in the consolidation of episodic memory. SWRs occur at a rate of 30-200 events per minute. Their overall abundance may, however, be reduced with aging and neurodegenerative disease. Here we report that the abundance of SWR within murine hippocampal slices can be increased by paced administration of a weak electrical stimulus, especially when the spontaneously occurring rate is low or compromised. Resultant SWRs have large variations in amplitude and ripple patterns, which are morphologically indistinguishable from those of spontaneous SWRs, despite identical stimulus parameters which presumably activate the same CA3 neurons surrounding the electrode. The stimulus intensity for reliably pacing SWRs is weaker than that required for inducing detectable evoked field potentials in CA1. Moreover, repetitive ~1 Hz stimuli with low intensity can reliably evoke thousands of SWRs without detectable LTD or "habituation." Our results suggest that weak stimuli may facilitate the spontaneous emergence of SWRs without significantly altering their characteristics. Pacing SWRs with weak electric stimuli could potentially be useful for restoring their abundance in the damaged hippocampus.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 20%
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Professor 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 16%
Engineering 4 9%
Psychology 3 7%
Mathematics 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 11 July 2023.
All research outputs
#4,549,873
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#3,539
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,127
of 351,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#82
of 256 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 351,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 256 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.