Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34168338›Full record

ArticleNature neuroscience2021

A large-scale nanoscopy and biochemistry analysis of postsynaptic dendritic spines.

Martin S Helm, Tal M Dankovich, Sunit Mandad, Burkhard Rammner, Sebastian Jähne, Vanessa Salimi, Christina Koerbs, Richard Leibrandt, Henning Urlaub, Thomas Schikorski and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Martin S HelmInternational Max-Planck Research School Molecular Biology, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6217-911X
Tal M DankovichGöttingen Graduate Center for Neurosciences Biophysics, and Molecular Biosciences, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4757-9462
Sunit MandadDepartment for Neuro- and Sensory Physiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Burkhard RammnerDepartment for Neuro- and Sensory Physiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Sebastian JähneGöttingen Graduate Center for Neurosciences Biophysics, and Molecular Biosciences, Göttingen, Germany.
Vanessa SalimiDepartment for Neuro- and Sensory Physiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Christina KoerbsDepartment for Neuro- and Sensory Physiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Richard LeibrandtData Analytics and Machine Learning Group, Department of Informatics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Henning UrlaubDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Thomas SchikorskiDepartment of Neuroscience, Universidad Central del Caribe, Bayamon, Puerto Rico, USA.
Silvio O RizzoliDepartment for Neuro- and Sensory Physiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. srizzol@gwdg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1667-7839
Universitätsmedizin Göttingen · DECentral University of the Caribbean · PRGerman Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases · DETechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

Synaptic Vesicle Dynamics at Hippocampal SynapsesR15NS095318 · NINDS · UNIVERSIDAD CENTRAL DEL CARIBE · PI SCHIKORSKI, THOMAS · 2016 to 2019
$608k
NINDS NIH HHS R15 NS095318
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dendritic spines, the postsynaptic compartments of excitatory neurotransmission, have different shapes classified from 'stubby' to 'mushroom-like'. Whereas mushroom spines are essential for adult brain function, stubby spines disappear during brain maturation. It is still unclear whether and how they differ in protein composition. To address this, we combined electron microscopy and quantitative biochemistry with super-resolution microscopy to annotate more than 47,000 spines for more than 100 synaptic targets. Surprisingly, mushroom and stubby spines have similar average protein copy numbers and topologies. However, an analysis of the correlation of each protein to the postsynaptic density mass, used as a marker of synaptic strength, showed substantially more significant results for the mushroom spines. Secretion and trafficking proteins correlated particularly poorly to the strength of stubby spines. This suggests that stubby spines are less likely to adequately respond to dynamic changes in synaptic transmission than mushroom spines, which possibly explains their loss during brain maturation.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrainDendritic SpinesMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionPost-Synaptic DensityProteomeRatsRats, WistarSynaptic TransmissionProteome

Identifiers

PMID34168338
OpenAlexW3174588745

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.