Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26385258›Full record

ArticleNeurobiology of learning and memory2016

Rebound spiking in layer II medial entorhinal cortex stellate cells: Possible mechanism of grid cell function.

Christopher F Shay, Michele Ferrante, G William Chapman, Michael E Hasselmo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurobiology of learning and memory, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

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

4 authors.

Christopher F ShayCenter for Systems Neuroscience, Center for Memory and Brain, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Graduate Program for Neuroscience, Boston University, 2 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Michele FerranteCenter for Systems Neuroscience, Center for Memory and Brain, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Graduate Program for Neuroscience, Boston University, 2 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
G William ChapmanCenter for Systems Neuroscience, Center for Memory and Brain, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Graduate Program for Neuroscience, Boston University, 2 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Michael E HasselmoCenter for Systems Neuroscience, Center for Memory and Brain, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Graduate Program for Neuroscience, Boston University, 2 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA 02215, USA. Electronic address: Hasselmo@bu.edu.

Funding

NEUROMODULATION AND CORTICAL MEMORY FUNCTIONR01MH060013 · NIMH · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI HASSELMO, MICHAEL E · 2000 to 2019
$6.8M
Mechanisms of Entorhinal Cortex FunctionR01MH061492 · NIMH · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI HASSELMO, MICHAEL E · 2000 to 2017
$5.0M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH060013NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH061492NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH60013NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH61492
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rebound spiking properties of medial entorhinal cortex (mEC) stellate cells induced by inhibition may underlie their functional properties in awake behaving rats, including the temporal phase separation of distinct grid cells and differences in grid cell firing properties. We investigated rebound spiking properties using whole cell patch recording in entorhinal slices, holding cells near spiking threshold and delivering sinusoidal inputs, superimposed with realistic inhibitory synaptic inputs to test the capacity of cells to selectively respond to specific phases of inhibitory input. Stellate cells showed a specific phase range of hyperpolarizing inputs that elicited spiking, but non-stellate cells did not show phase specificity. In both cell types, the phase range of spiking output occurred between the peak and subsequent descending zero crossing of the sinusoid. The phases of inhibitory inputs that induced spikes shifted earlier as the baseline sinusoid frequency increased, while spiking output shifted to later phases. Increases in magnitude of the inhibitory inputs shifted the spiking output to earlier phases. Pharmacological blockade of h-current abolished the phase selectivity of hyperpolarizing inputs eliciting spikes. A network computational model using cells possessing similar rebound properties as found in vitro produces spatially periodic firing properties resembling grid cell firing when a simulated animal moves along a linear track. These results suggest that the ability of mEC stellate cells to fire rebound spikes in response to a specific range of phases of inhibition could support complex attractor dynamics that provide completion and separation to maintain spiking activity of specific grid cell populations.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsModels, NeurologicalNeural InhibitionAnimalsElectric StimulationEntorhinal CortexFemaleGrid CellsMaleMembrane PotentialsNeuronsRatsRats, Long-Evansh-currentInhibitionOscillationsResonanceWhole-cell

Identifiers

PMID26385258
PMCPMC4792788

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.