Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25954930›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2015

Modelling the Effects of Electrical Coupling between Unmyelinated Axons of Brainstem Neurons Controlling Rhythmic Activity.

Michael J Hull, Stephen R Soffe, David J Willshaw, Alan Roberts

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Mechanisms Underlying the Recruitment of Inhibitory Interneurons in Fictive Swimming in DevelopingThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Axonal Computations.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2019
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael J HullInstitute for Adaptive and Neural Computation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Stephen R SoffeSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
David J WillshawInstitute for Adaptive and Neural Computation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Alan RobertsSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
University of Bristol · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gap junctions between fine unmyelinated axons can electrically couple groups of brain neurons to synchronise firing and contribute to rhythmic activity. To explore the distribution and significance of electrical coupling, we modelled a well analysed, small population of brainstem neurons which drive swimming in young frog tadpoles. A passive network of 30 multicompartmental neurons with unmyelinated axons was used to infer that: axon-axon gap junctions close to the soma gave the best match to experimentally measured coupling coefficients; axon diameter had a strong influence on coupling; most neurons were coupled indirectly via the axons of other neurons. When active channels were added, gap junctions could make action potential propagation along the thin axons unreliable. Increased sodium and decreased potassium channel densities in the initial axon segment improved action potential propagation. Modelling suggested that the single spike firing to step current injection observed in whole-cell recordings is not a cellular property but a dynamic consequence of shunting resulting from electrical coupling. Without electrical coupling, firing of the population during depolarising current was unsynchronised; with coupling, the population showed synchronous recruitment and rhythmic firing. When activated instead by increasing levels of modelled sensory pathway input, the population without electrical coupling was recruited incrementally to unpatterned activity. However, when coupled, the population was recruited all-or-none at threshold into a rhythmic swimming pattern: the tadpole "decided" to swim. Modelling emphasises uncertainties about fine unmyelinated axon physiology but, when informed by biological data, makes general predictions about gap junctions: locations close to the soma; relatively small numbers; many indirect connections between neurons; cause of action potential propagation failure in fine axons; misleading alteration of intrinsic firing properties. Modelling also indicates that electrical coupling within a population can synchronize recruitment of neurons and their pacemaker firing during rhythmic activity.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAction PotentialsAnimalsAxonsBrain StemComputational BiologyElectrophysiological PhenomenaGap JunctionsLarvaNerve Fibers, UnmyelinatedPatch-Clamp TechniquesSwimmingXenopus laevis

Identifiers

PMID25954930
PMCPMC4425518
OpenAlexW329593390

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.