Neural Circuit and Cognitive Development 2020
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-814411-4.00001-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Neural circuits of the mammalian main olfactory bulb

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 161 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In CA1, however, fast-and slow-gamma-frequency synchronization of principal cells is driven extrinsically by shifting communication between medial entorhinal cortex and hippocampal CA3, respectively (Colgin et al, 2009), while our results in the MOB instead point toward differential synchronization of complementary cell types receiving common inputs. These differences notwithstanding, leading hypotheses respectively associate fast-vs. slow-gammafrequency oscillations in CA1 with the encoding of current spatial information vs. spatial memory retrieval (Colgin, 2015), functions provocatively similar to burgeoning evidence respectively linking TC vs. MC activity to the encoding of current olfactory surroundings vs. learned olfactory context (Burton et al, 2020). This potential functional correspondence between fast-and slow-gammafrequency oscillations of the MOB and hippocampus, while speculative, warrants further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In CA1, however, fast-and slow-gamma-frequency synchronization of principal cells is driven extrinsically by shifting communication between medial entorhinal cortex and hippocampal CA3, respectively (Colgin et al, 2009), while our results in the MOB instead point toward differential synchronization of complementary cell types receiving common inputs. These differences notwithstanding, leading hypotheses respectively associate fast-vs. slow-gammafrequency oscillations in CA1 with the encoding of current spatial information vs. spatial memory retrieval (Colgin, 2015), functions provocatively similar to burgeoning evidence respectively linking TC vs. MC activity to the encoding of current olfactory surroundings vs. learned olfactory context (Burton et al, 2020). This potential functional correspondence between fast-and slow-gammafrequency oscillations of the MOB and hippocampus, while speculative, warrants further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…First, whether and how tufted cells (TCs) synchronize their firing has not been tested. Overwhelming evidence has established that TCs, a second type of excitatory MOB principal cell, differ from MCs in their intrinsic and synaptic properties, sensory responses, and axonal projections (Shepherd et al, 2004;Nagayama et al, 2014;Burton et al, 2020). Not only do these findings support a model in which TCs and MCs form parallel pathways encoding complementary information, but they further suggest that TCs and MCs may differentially engage in fast network oscillations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The cellular composition and synaptic connectivity of the rodent OB are reasonably well established (for review see Burton et al 2020;Nagayama et al 2014;Wachowiak and Shipley 2006), a prerequisite of understanding neuromodulatory effects. We want to briefly introduce the anatomy of the OB and mention cell types that have been shown to play a role as effectors of extrinsic neuromodulation.…”
Section: Neuroanatomy Of the Vertebrate Olfactory Bulbmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In CA1, however, fast-and slow-gamma-frequency synchronization of principal cells is driven extrinsically by shifting communication between medial entorhinal cortex and hippocampal CA3, respectively (Colgin et al, 2009), while our results in the MOB instead point toward differential synchronization of complementary cell types receiving common inputs. These differences notwithstanding, leading hypotheses respectively associate fast-vs. slow-gamma-frequency oscillations in CA1 with the encoding of current spatial information vs. spatial memory retrieval (Colgin, 2015), functions provocatively similar to burgeoning evidence respectively linking TC vs. MC activity to the encoding of current olfactory surroundings vs. learned olfactory context (Burton et al, 2020). This potential functional correspondence between fast-and slow-gamma-frequency oscillations of the MOB and hippocampus, while speculative, warrants further investigation.…”
Section: Fast-and Slow-gamma-frequency Synchrony In the Mobmentioning
confidence: 73%