↓ Skip to main content

Direct measurement of somatic voltage clamp errors in central neurons

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Neuroscience, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
309 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
540 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Direct measurement of somatic voltage clamp errors in central neurons
Published in
Nature Neuroscience, June 2008
DOI 10.1038/nn.2137
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen R Williams, Simon J Mitchell

Abstract

The somatic voltage clamp technique has revolutionized understanding of synaptic physiology and the excitability of neurons. Although computer simulations have indicated that the somatic voltage clamp poorly controls voltage in the dendritic tree of neurons, where the majority of synaptic contacts are made, there has not been an experimental description of the performance of the somatic voltage clamp. Here, we directly quantify errors in the measurement of dendritic synaptic input by the somatic voltage clamp using simultaneous whole-cell recordings from the soma and apical dendrite of rat neocortical pyramidal neurons. The somatic voltage clamp did not control voltage at sites other than the soma and distorted measurement of the amplitude, kinetics, slope conductance and reversal potential of synaptic inputs in a dendritic distance-dependent manner. These errors question the use of the somatic voltage clamp as a quantitative tool in dendritic neurons.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 540 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 22 4%
Germany 7 1%
United Kingdom 6 1%
France 4 <1%
Japan 4 <1%
Portugal 4 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Other 6 1%
Unknown 482 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 151 28%
Researcher 145 27%
Student > Master 40 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 37 7%
Professor 36 7%
Other 79 15%
Unknown 52 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 250 46%
Neuroscience 155 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 4%
Engineering 12 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 2%
Other 33 6%
Unknown 59 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 18 July 2023.
All research outputs
#2,463,023
of 24,079,362 outputs
Outputs from Nature Neuroscience
#2,594
of 5,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,691
of 84,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Neuroscience
#8
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,079,362 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 84,939 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.