ArticlePloS one2021
A comparison of three different methods of eliciting rapid activity-dependent synaptic plasticity at the Drosophila NMJ.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Many faces of neuronal activity manipulation in Drosophila.Neural regeneration research · 2025Article
- TheFrontiers in synaptic neuroscience · 2024Article
- Drosophila motor neuron boutons remodel through membrane blebbing coupled with muscle contraction.Nature communications · 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 Drosophila NMJ is a system of choice for investigating the mechanisms underlying the structural and functional modifications evoked during activity-dependent synaptic plasticity. Because fly genetics allows considerable versatility, many strategies can be employed to elicit this activity. Here, we compare three different stimulation methods for eliciting activity-dependent changes in structure and function at the Drosophila NMJ. We find that the method using patterned stimulations driven by a K+-rich solution creates robust structural modifications but reduces muscle viability, as assessed by resting potential and membrane resistance. We argue that, using this method, electrophysiological studies that consider the frequency of events, rather than their amplitude, are the only reliable studies. We contrast these results with the expression of CsChrimson channels and red-light stimulation at the NMJ, as well as with the expression of TRPA channels and temperature stimulation. With both these methods we observed reliable modifications of synaptic structures and consistent changes in electrophysiological properties. Indeed, we observed a rapid appearance of immature boutons that lack postsynaptic differentiation, and a potentiation of spontaneous neurotransmission frequency. Surprisingly, a patterned application of temperature changes alone is sufficient to provoke both structural and functional plasticity. In this context, temperature-dependent TRPA channel activation induces additional structural plasticity but no further increase in the frequency of spontaneous neurotransmission, suggesting an uncoupling of these mechanisms.
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.