Cell‐type specific GABA synaptic transmission and activity‐dependent plasticity in rat hippocampal stratum radiatum interneurons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In hippocampal pyramidal cells, the efficacy of synaptic transmission at gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)ergic synapses, is modulated by activity. However, whether such plasticity occurs at inhibitory synapses on interneurons remains largely unknown. Using whole-cell voltage-clamp recordings of inhibitory postsynaptic currents (IPSCs) in Sprague-Dawley rat hippocampal slices, we examined whether GABA synapses of stratum radiatum interneurons were affected by stimulation protocols known to alter efficacy at inhibitory synapses of CA1 pyramidal cells. Monosynaptically evoked IPSCs (eIPSCs) exhibited different properties with significantly faster kinetics, higher coefficients of variation, a current-voltage (I-V) relationship shifted to depolarized values and a smaller paired-pulse depression, in interneurons than in pyramidal cells. GABA synapses on interneurons also showed a different capacity for plasticity. Indeed, theta-burst stimulation induced a long-term potentiation of eIPSCs in both cell types, but the induction mechanisms differed in interneurons, as it was not affected by antagonists of GABAB receptors and group I/II metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs). Furthermore, 100-Hz tetanization selectively elicited a short-term depression of eIPSCs in pyramidal cells. A postsynaptic depolarization produced a transient suppression of eIPSCs (depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition) in pyramidal cells but not in interneurons. Spontaneous IPSCs were similarly reduced following depolarization in pyramidal cells, but not in interneurons. These results indicate that GABA synapses of stratum radiatum interneurons exhibit different properties and capacity for activity-dependent plasticity than those of pyramidal cells. This cell-type specific mode of transmission and adaptive regulation of GABA synapses may contribute to hippocampal plasticity and functions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".