Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25232126›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2014

The recurrent case for the Renshaw cell.

Gardave S Bhumbra, B Anne Bannatyne, Masahiko Watanabe, Andrew J Todd, David J Maxwell, Marco Beato

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Spinal interneurons of the lower urinary tract circuits.Autonomic neuroscience : basic & clinical · 2021
    Review
  9. Spatial and Temporal Arrangement of Recurrent Inhibition in the Primate Upper Limb.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  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

6 authors.

Gardave S BhumbraUCL Department of Neuroscience, Physiology and Pharmacology, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
B Anne BannatyneSpinal Cord Group, Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, United Kingdom, and.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1819-630X
Masahiko WatanabeHokkaido University, Department of Anatomy and Embryology, Sapporo, 060-8638, Japan.
Andrew J ToddSpinal Cord Group, Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, United Kingdom, and.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3007-6749
David J MaxwellSpinal Cord Group, Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, United Kingdom, and m.beato@ucl.ac.uk david.maxwell@glasgow.ac.uk.
Marco BeatoUCL Department of Neuroscience, Physiology and Pharmacology, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom, m.beato@ucl.ac.uk david.maxwell@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7283-8318

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L000547Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L001454Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 088279/A/09/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although Renshaw cells (RCs) were discovered over half a century ago, their precise role in recurrent inhibition and ability to modulate motoneuron excitability have yet to be established. Indirect measurements of recurrent inhibition have suggested only a weak modulatory effect but are limited by the lack of observed motoneuron responses to inputs from single RCs. Here we present dual recordings between connected RC-motoneuron pairs, performed on mouse spinal cord. Motoneuron responses demonstrated that Renshaw synapses elicit large inhibitory conductances and show short-term potentiation. Anatomical reconstruction, combined with a novel method of quantal analysis, showed that the strong inhibitory input from RCs results from the large number of synaptic contacts that they make onto individual motoneurons. We used the NEURON simulation environment to construct realistic electrotonic models, which showed that inhibitory conductances from Renshaw inputs exert considerable shunting effects in motoneurons and reduce the frequency of spikes generated by excitatory inputs. This was confirmed experimentally by showing that excitation of a single RC or selective activation of the recurrent inhibitory pathway to generate equivalent inhibitory conductances both suppress motoneuron firing. We conclude that recurrent inhibition is remarkably effective, in that a single action potential from one RC is sufficient to silence a motoneuron. Although our results may differ from previous indirect observations, they underline a need for a reevaluation of the role that RCs perform in one of the first neuronal circuits to be discovered.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsAnimalsFemaleInterneuronsMaleMiceModels, NeurologicalMotor NeuronsNeural InhibitionSpinal Cordfeedback inhibitionmotoneuronquantal analysisspinal cord

Identifiers

PMID25232126
PMCPMC4166169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.