Corrigendum: Animal-to-Animal Variability in Neuromodulation and Circuit Function: Figure 5.

Hamood, Albert W.; Marder, Eve

doi:10.1101/sqb.2014.79.026955

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The absolute numbers of synapses between specific partners can vary across individuals, hemispheres, or repeated network modules in the same individual ( Bartol et al., 2015 ; Eichler et al., 2017 ; Gerhard et al., 2017 ; Goodman, 1978 ; Hamood and Marder, 2015 ; Jovanic et al., 2016 ; Lu et al., 2009 ; Ohyama et al., 2015 ; Ryan et al., 2016 ; Schneider-Mizell et al., 2016 ; Takemura et al., 2015 ; Tobin et al., 2017 ; Ward et al., 1975 ). However, recent electron microscopy (EM) reconstructions in multiple Drosophila larvae suggest that, at least in some circuits, the relative numbers of synapses between partners are precisely regulated ( Eichler et al., 2017 ; Gerhard et al., 2017 ; Jovanic et al., 2016 ; Ohyama et al., 2015 ; Takemura et al., 2017 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Connectomics Reveals How Partner Identity, Location, and Activity Specify Synaptic Connectivity in Drosophila

Valdes-Aleman¹,

Fetter²,

Sales³

et al. 2021

Neuron

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The mechanisms by which synaptic partners recognize each other and establish appropriate numbers of connections during embryonic development to form functional neural circuits are poorly understood. We combined electron microscopy reconstruction, functional imaging of neural activity, and behavioral experiments to elucidate the roles of (1) partner identity, (2) location, and (3) activity in circuit assembly in the embryonic nerve cord of Drosophila . We found that postsynaptic partners are able to find and connect to their presynaptic partners even when these have been shifted to ectopic locations or silenced. However, orderly positioning of axon terminals by positional cues and synaptic activity is required for appropriate numbers of connections between specific partners, for appropriate balance between excitatory and inhibitory connections, and for appropriate functional connectivity and behavior. Our study reveals with unprecedented resolution the fine connectivity effects of multiple factors that work together to control the assembly of neural circuits.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Connectomics Reveals How Partner Identity, Location, and Activity Specify Synaptic Connectivity in Drosophila

Valdes-Aleman¹,

Fetter²,

Sales³

et al. 2021

Neuron

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Long-lasting changes in neural networks to compensate for altered nicotinic input

John

Berg

2015

Biochemical Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nervous system must balance excitatory and inhibitory input to constrain network activity levels within a proper dynamic range. This is a demanding requirement during development when networks form and throughout adulthood as networks respond to constantly changing environments. Defects in the ability to sustain a proper balance of excitatory and inhibitory activity are characteristic of numerous neurological disorders such as schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s disease, and autism. A variety of homeostatic mechanisms appear to be critical for balancing excitatory and inhibitory activity in a network. These are operative at the level of individual neurons, regulating their excitability by adjusting the numbers and types of ion channels, and at the level of synaptic connections, determining the relative numbers of excitatory versus inhibitory connections a neuron receives. Nicotinic cholinergic signaling is well positioned to contribute at both levels because it appears early in development, extends across much of the nervous system, and modulates transmission at many kinds of synapses. Further, it is known to influence the ratio of excitatory-to-inhibitory synapses formed on neurons during development. GABAergic inhibitory neurons are likely to be key for maintaining network homeostasis (limiting excitatory output), and nicotinic signaling is known to prominently regulate the activity of several GABAergic neuronal subtypes. But how nicotinic signaling achieves this and how networks may compensate for the loss of such input are important questions remaining unanswered. These issues are reviewed.

show abstract

Corrigendum: Animal-to-Animal Variability in Neuromodulation and Circuit Function: Figure 5.

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Comparative Connectomics Reveals How Partner Identity, Location, and Activity Specify Synaptic Connectivity in Drosophila

Comparative Connectomics Reveals How Partner Identity, Location, and Activity Specify Synaptic Connectivity in Drosophila

Long-lasting changes in neural networks to compensate for altered nicotinic input

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About