↓ Skip to main content

Corticostriatal interactions in the generation of tic-like behaviors after local striatal disinhibition

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Neurology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Corticostriatal interactions in the generation of tic-like behaviors after local striatal disinhibition
Published in
Experimental Neurology, January 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.expneurol.2015.01.001
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The pathophysiology of the tics that define Gilles de la Tourette syndrome (TS) is not well understood. Local disinhibition within the striatum has been hypothesized to play a pathogenic role. In support of this, experimental disinhibition by local antagonism of GABA-A receptors within the striatum produces tic-like phenomenology in monkey and rat. We replicated this effect in mice via local picrotoxin infusion into the dorsal striatum. Infusion of picrotoxin into sensorimotor cortex produced similar movements, accompanied by signs of behavioral activation; higher-dose picrotoxin in the cortex produced seizures. Striatal inhibition with local muscimol completely abolished tic-like movements after either striatal or cortical picrotoxin, confirming their dependence on the striatal circuitry; in contrast, cortical muscimol attenuated but did not abolish movements produced by striatal picrotoxin. Striatal glutamate blockade eliminated tic-like movements after striatal picrotoxin, indicating that glutamatergic afferents are critical for their generation. These studies replicate and extend previous work in monkey and rat, providing additional validation for the local disinhibition model of tic generation. Our results reveal a key role for corticostriatal glutamatergic afferents in the generation of tic-like movements in this model.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 3 5%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 16 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Psychology 6 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 20 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 January 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Neurology
#3,370
of 3,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#280,409
of 377,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Neurology
#30
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,972 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 377,427 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.