Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0166-2236(98)01305-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Plasticity of the olivocerebellar pathway

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
58
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 115 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
0
58
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, Boyden and colleagues (Boyden and Raymond, 2003; see also Miles and Eighmy, 1980;Van Alphen and De Zeeuw, 2002;Faulstich et al, 2004) pointed out that gain-decrease paradigms show different dynamics compared with those of gain-increase paradigms and that it is therefore unlikely that they both depend on LTD. Second, LTP induction is supposed to increase the insertion of AMPA receptors and thereby enlarge their postsynaptic complex, whereas LTD induction at these synapses could only decrease their size because of the endocytosis of these receptors and their associated protein complexes (Strata and Rossi, 1998;Hansel et al, 2001;Song and Huganir, 2002;Coesmans et al, 2004). Moreover, because climbing fiber activity can only promote LTD at the parallel fiber synapse , one does not expect a change at the climbing fiber synapse if the promoting effect of E2 is specific for LTP induction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, Boyden and colleagues (Boyden and Raymond, 2003; see also Miles and Eighmy, 1980;Van Alphen and De Zeeuw, 2002;Faulstich et al, 2004) pointed out that gain-decrease paradigms show different dynamics compared with those of gain-increase paradigms and that it is therefore unlikely that they both depend on LTD. Second, LTP induction is supposed to increase the insertion of AMPA receptors and thereby enlarge their postsynaptic complex, whereas LTD induction at these synapses could only decrease their size because of the endocytosis of these receptors and their associated protein complexes (Strata and Rossi, 1998;Hansel et al, 2001;Song and Huganir, 2002;Coesmans et al, 2004). Moreover, because climbing fiber activity can only promote LTD at the parallel fiber synapse , one does not expect a change at the climbing fiber synapse if the promoting effect of E2 is specific for LTP induction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The spiny dendrites of mormyrid Purkinje cells are equivalent to the spiny branchlets of mammalian Purkinje cells. In the mammalian cerebellum, PFs contact spines on the spiny branchlets, whereas the CF input contacts spines that occur at low density on the primary, secondary, and tertiary dendrites from which the spiny branchlets arise (Larramendi and Victor, 1967;Strata and Rossi, 1998). Thus, in both the mormyrid and the mammalian cerebellum, the PF and CF input territories do not overlap, but in mormyrid Purkinje cells, the separation between the CF input and distal PF inputs is more pronounced.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each Purkinje cell receives ϳ100,000 synapses (in the mouse) from small unmyelinated parallel fibers that are the axons of cerebellar granule cells and run normal to the plane of the Purkinje cell dendrite . In marked contrast, each Purkinje cell is said to be innervated by a single climbing fiber (CF) axon, originating in the inferior olive, and elaborating ϳ1400 release sites (Strata and Rossi, 1998) (measured in the rat). Although each Purkinje cell is multiply-innervated at birth, an activity-dependent regression of supernumerary CFs proceeds, yielding single innervation for most Purkinje cells by postnatal day (P) 21 Lohof et al, 1996).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%