↓ Skip to main content

Input integration around the dendritic branches in hippocampal dentate granule cells

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive Neurodynamics, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Input integration around the dendritic branches in hippocampal dentate granule cells
Published in
Cognitive Neurodynamics, January 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11571-014-9280-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tadanobu Chuyo Kamijo, Hirofumi Hayakawa, Yasuhiro Fukushima, Yoshiyuki Kubota, Yoshikazu Isomura, Minoru Tsukada, Takeshi Aihara

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that the dendrites of several neurons are not simple translators but are crucial facilitators of excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP) propagation and summation of synaptic inputs to compensate for inherent voltage attenuation. Granule cells (GCs)are located at the gateway for valuable information arriving at the hippocampus from the entorhinal cortex. However, the underlying mechanisms of information integration along the dendrites of GCs in the hippocampus are still unclear. In this study, we investigated the input integration around dendritic branches of GCs in the rat hippocampus. We applied differential spatiotemporal stimulations to the dendrites using a high-speed glutamate-uncaging laser. Our results showed that when two sites close to and equidistant from a branching point were simultaneously stimulated, a nonlinear summation of EPSPs was observed at the soma. In addition, nonlinear summation (facilitation) depended on the stimulus location and was significantly blocked by the application of a voltage-dependent Ca(2+) channel antagonist. These findings suggest that the nonlinear summation of EPSPs around the dendritic branches of hippocampal GCs is a result of voltage-dependent Ca(2+) channel activation and may play a crucial role in the integration of input information.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 6%
Netherlands 1 6%
Unknown 16 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 33%
Researcher 4 22%
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Master 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 7 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 28%
Psychology 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Unknown 4 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2014.
All research outputs
#15,998,718
of 25,302,890 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Neurodynamics
#121
of 349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,823
of 318,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Neurodynamics
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,302,890 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 349 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them