Spatial Relationships between GABAergic and Glutamatergic Synapses on the Dendrites of Distinct Types of Mouse Retinal Ganglion Cells across Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuronal output requires a concerted balance between excitatory and inhibitory (I/E) input. Like other circuits, inhibitory synaptogenesis in the retina precedes excitatory synaptogenesis. How then do neurons attain their mature balance of I/E ratios despite temporal offset in synaptogenesis? To directly compare the development of glutamatergic and GABAergic synapses onto the same cell, we biolistically transfected retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) with PSD95CFP, a marker of glutamatergic postsynaptic sites, in transgenic Thy1-YFPγ2 mice in which GABAA receptors are fluorescently tagged. We mapped YFPγ2 and PSD95CFP puncta distributions on three RGC types at postnatal day P12, shortly before eye opening, and at P21 when robust light responses in RGCs are present. The mature IGABA/E ratios varied among ON-Sustained (S) A-type, OFF-S A-type, and bistratified direction selective (DS) RGCs. These ratios were attained at different rates, before eye-opening for ON-S and OFF-S A-type, and after eye-opening for DS RGCs. At both ages examined, the IGABA/E ratio was uniform across the arbors of the three RGC types. Furthermore, measurements of the distances between neighboring PSD95CFP and YFPγ2 puncta on RGC dendrites indicate that their local relationship is established early in development, and cannot be predicted by random organization. These close spatial associations between glutamatergic and GABAergic postsynaptic sites appear to represent local synaptic arrangements revealed by correlative light and EM reconstructions of a single RGC's dendrites. Thus, although RGC types have different IGABA/E ratios and establish these ratios at separate rates, the local relationship between excitatory and inhibitory inputs appear similarly constrained across the RGC types studied.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".