Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37526175›Full record

ArticleeLife2023

How inhibitory and excitatory inputs gate output of the inferior olive.

Sebastián Loyola, Tycho M Hoogland, Hugo Hoedemaker, Vincenzo Romano, Mario Negrello, Chris I De Zeeuw

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. The cerebellum modulates thirst.Nature neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  12. A cerebellar population coding model for sensorimotor learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors.

Sebastián Loyola *Department of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6029-2274
Tycho M Hoogland *Department of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7444-9279
Hugo HoedemakerNetherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Royal Academy of Arts & Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Vincenzo RomanoDepartment of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4449-6541
Mario Negrello *Department of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8527-4259
Chris I De Zeeuw *Department of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5628-8187

Funding

European Research Council GA-294775European Research Council nrs. 737619 and 768914
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The inferior olive provides the climbing fibers to Purkinje cells in the cerebellar cortex, where they elicit all-or-none complex spikes and control major forms of plasticity. Given their important role in both short-term and long-term coordination of cerebellum-dependent behaviors, it is paramount to understand the factors that determine the output of olivary neurons. Here, we use mouse models to investigate how the inhibitory and excitatory inputs to the olivary neurons interact with each other, generating spiking patterns of olivary neurons that align with their intrinsic oscillations. Using dual color optogenetic stimulation and whole-cell recordings, we demonstrate how intervals between the inhibitory input from the cerebellar nuclei and excitatory input from the mesodiencephalic junction affect phase and gain of the olivary output at both the sub- and suprathreshold level. When the excitatory input is activated shortly (~50 ms) after the inhibitory input, the phase of the intrinsic oscillations becomes remarkably unstable and the excitatory input can hardly generate any olivary spike. Instead, when the excitatory input is activated one cycle (~150 ms) after the inhibitory input, the excitatory input can optimally drive olivary spiking, riding on top of the first cycle of the subthreshold oscillations that have been powerfully reset by the preceding inhibitory input. Simulations of a large-scale network model of the inferior olive highlight to what extent the synaptic interactions penetrate in the neuropil, generating quasi-oscillatory spiking patterns in large parts of the olivary subnuclei, the size of which also depends on the relative timing of the inhibitory and excitatory inputs.

Indexed as

Cerebellar NucleiOlivary NucleusAction PotentialsAnimalsCerebellumMiceNeuronsPurkinje Cellsgap junctionsinferior olivemouseneuroscienceoscillationssynaptic activity

Identifiers

PMID37526175
PMCPMC10393294

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.