Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22179551›Full record

ArticleNature methods2011

Principles for applying optogenetic tools derived from direct comparative analysis of microbial opsins.

Joanna Mattis, Kay M Tye, Emily A Ferenczi, Charu Ramakrishnan, Daniel J O'Shea, Rohit Prakash, Lisa A Gunaydin, Minsuk Hyun, Lief E Fenno, Viviana Gradinaru and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nature methods, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 410 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
410citing papers in PubMed
20.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

410 citing papers in PubMed, 793 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Hemodynamic and Electrophysiological Progression of the Rose Bengal Photothrombotic Stroke Model in Mice.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

350 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Joanna MattisDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Kay M Tye
Emily A Ferenczi
Charu Ramakrishnan
Daniel J O'Shea
Rohit Prakash
Lisa A Gunaydin
Minsuk Hyun
Lief E Fenno
Viviana Gradinaru
Ofer Yizhar
Karl Deisseroth
Stanford University · USHoward Hughes Medical Institute · USWeizmann Institute of Science · IL

Funding

A Novel Strategy for Combating Obesity: Reprogramming Neural CircuitsDP2DK102256 · NIDDK · SALK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL STUDIES · PI TYE, KAY MAXINE · 2013 to 2018
$2.7M
The effects of thalamoamygdalar synaptic potentiation on learning performanceF32MH088010 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI TYE, KAY MAXINE · 2009 to 2011
$120k
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNIDDK NIH HHS DP2 DK102256NIMH NIH HHS 1F32MH088010-01NIMH NIH HHS F32 MH088010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diverse optogenetic tools have allowed versatile control over neural activity. Many depolarizing and hyperpolarizing tools have now been developed in multiple laboratories and tested across different preparations, presenting opportunities but also making it difficult to draw direct comparisons. This challenge has been compounded by the dependence of performance on parameters such as vector, promoter, expression time, illumination, cell type and many other variables. As a result, it has become increasingly complicated for end users to select the optimal reagents for their experimental needs. For a rapidly growing field, critical figures of merit should be formalized both to establish a framework for further development and so that end users can readily understand how these standardized parameters translate into performance. Here we systematically compared microbial opsins under matched experimental conditions to extract essential principles and identify key parameters for the conduct, design and interpretation of experiments involving optogenetic techniques.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsAnimalsKineticsLightOpsinsPyramidal CellsOpsins

Identifiers

PMID22179551
PMCPMC4165888
OpenAlexW1969650326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.