ArticleJournal of theoretical biology2018
Paradoxical LTP maintenance with inhibition of protein synthesis and the proteasome suggests a novel protein synthesis requirement for early LTP reversal.
Article in Journal of theoretical biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- PSMC3 proteasome subunit variants are associated with neurodevelopmental delay and type I interferon production.Science translational medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The transition from early long-term potentiation (E-LTP) to late long-term potentiation (L-LTP) is a multistep process that involves both protein synthesis and degradation. The ways in which these two opposing processes interact to establish L-LTP are not well understood, however. For example, L-LTP is attenuated by inhibiting either protein synthesis or proteasome-dependent degradation prior to and during a tetanic stimulus (e.g., Huang et al., 1996; Karpova et al., 2006), but paradoxically, L-LTP is not attenuated when synthesis and degradation are inhibited simultaneously (Fonseca et al., 2006). These paradoxical results suggest that counter-acting 'positive' and 'negative' proteins regulate L-LTP. To investigate the basis of this paradox, we developed a model of LTP at the Schaffer collateral to CA1 pyramidal cell synapse. The model consists of nine ordinary differential equations that describe the levels of both positive- and negative-regulator proteins (PP and NP, respectively) and the transitions among five discrete synaptic states, including a basal state (BAS), three states corresponding to E-LTP (EP1, EP2, and ED), and a L-LTP state (LP). An LTP-inducing stimulus: 1) initiates the transition from BAS to EP1 and from EP1 to EP2; 2) initiates the synthesis of PP and NP; and finally; 3) activates the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS), which in turn, mediates transitions of EP1 and EP2 to ED and the degradation of NP. The conversion of E-LTP to L-LTP is mediated by the PP-dependent transition from ED to LP, whereas NP mediates reversal of EP2 to BAS. We found that the inclusion of the five discrete synaptic states was necessary to simulate key empirical observations: 1) normal L-LTP, 2) block of L-LTP by either proteasome inhibitor or protein synthesis inhibitor alone, and 3) preservation of L-LTP when both inhibitors are applied together. Although our model is abstract, elements of the model can be correlated with specific molecular processes. Moreover, the model correctly captures the dynamics of protein synthesis- and degradation-dependent phases of LTP, and it makes testable predictions, such as a unique synaptic state (ED) that precedes the transition from E-LTP to L-LTP, and a well-defined time window for the action of the UPS (i.e., during the transitions from EP1 and EP2 to ED). Tests of these predictions will provide new insights into the processes and dynamics of long-term synaptic plasticity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.