Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38320473›Full record

ReviewCurrent biology : CB2024

Synaptic promiscuity in brain development.

Neele Wolterhoff, P Robin Hiesinger

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current biology : CB, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Stereotypical interciliary contacts in abioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  4. Sequential formation ofScience advances · 2026
    Article
  5. Imprecision in Vision: Lessons From Neural Circuits in the Fly.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Population Morphology Implies a Common Developmental Blueprint forbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  9. Brain-wide mapping of developmental trajectories of cerebellar efferent projections.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Nervous system-wide analysis of allScience advances · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
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

2 authors.

Neele WolterhoffDivision of Neurobiology, Free University Berlin, 14195 Berlin, Germany.
P Robin HiesingerDivision of Neurobiology, Free University Berlin, 14195 Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: robin.hiesinger@fu-berlin.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Precise synaptic connectivity is a prerequisite for the function of neural circuits, yet individual neurons, taken out of their developmental context, readily form unspecific synapses. How does the genome encode brain wiring in light of this apparent contradiction? Synaptic specificity is the outcome of a long series of developmental processes and mechanisms before, during and after synapse formation. How much promiscuity is permissible or necessary at the moment of synaptic partner choice depends on the extent to which prior development restricts available partners or subsequent development corrects initially made synapses. Synaptic promiscuity at the moment of choice can thereby play important roles in the development of precise connectivity, but also facilitate developmental flexibility and robustness. In this review, we assess the experimental evidence for the prevalence and roles of promiscuous synapse formation during brain development. Many well-established experimental approaches are based on developmental genetic perturbation and an assessment of synaptic connectivity only in the adult; this can make it difficult to pinpoint when a given defect or mechanism occurred. In many cases, such studies reveal mechanisms that restrict partner availability already prior to synapse formation. Subsequently, at the moment of choice, factors including synaptic competency, interaction dynamics and molecular recognition further restrict synaptic partners. The discussion of the development of synaptic specificity through the lens of synaptic promiscuity suggests an algorithmic process based on neurons capable of promiscuous synapse formation that are continuously prevented from making the wrong choices, with no single mechanism or developmental time point sufficient to explain the outcome.

Indexed as

NeuronsSynapsesBrainNeurogenesis

Identifiers

PMID38320473
PMCPMC10849093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.