Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23847473›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neural circuits2013

Beyond "all-or-nothing" climbing fibers: graded representation of teaching signals in Purkinje cells.

Farzaneh Najafi, Javier F Medina

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neural circuits, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Farzaneh NajafiDepartment of Biology, University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Javier F Medina
University of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Coding and processing of error signals in inferior olivary-cerebellar networksR01MH093727 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI JAVIER F MEDINA · 2011 to 2026
$6.7M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH093727NIMH NIH HHS R01MH093727
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Arguments about the function of the climbing fiber (CF) input to the cerebellar cortex have fueled a rabid debate that started over 40 years ago, and continues to polarize the field to this day. The origin of the controversy can be traced back to 1969, the year David Marr published part of his dissertation work in a paper entitled "A theory of cerebellar cortex." In Marr's theory, CFs play a key role during the process of motor learning, providing an instructive signal that serves as a "teacher" for the post-synaptic Purkinje cells. Although this influential idea has found its way into the mainstream, a number of objections have been raised. For example, several investigators have pointed out that the seemingly "all-or-nothing" activation of the CF input provides little information and is too ambiguous to serve as an effective instructive signal. Here, we take a fresh look at these arguments in light of new evidence about the peculiar physiology of CFs. Based on recent findings we propose that at the level of an individual Purkinje cell, a graded instructive signal can be effectively encoded via pre- or post-synaptic modulation of its one and only CF input.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsAnimalsHumansNerve FibersPurkinje CellsSignal TransductionSynaptic Potentialscalciumcerebellumcomplex spikedendriteLTDmossy fibermotor learning

Identifiers

PMID23847473
PMCPMC3698456
OpenAlexW2146555760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.