↓ Skip to main content

Bidirectional Scaling of Astrocytic Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor Signaling following Long-Term Changes in Neuronal Firing Rates

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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.
Title
Bidirectional Scaling of Astrocytic Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor Signaling following Long-Term Changes in Neuronal Firing Rates
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0049637
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alison X. Xie, Min-Yu Sun, Thomas Murphy, Kelli Lauderdale, Elizabeth Tiglao, Todd A. Fiacco

Abstract

Very little is known about the ability of astrocytic receptors to exhibit plasticity as a result of changes in neuronal activity. Here we provide evidence for bidirectional scaling of astrocytic group I metabotropic glutamate receptor signaling in acute mouse hippocampal slices following long-term changes in neuronal firing rates. Plasticity of astrocytic mGluRs was measured by recording spontaneous and evoked Ca²⁺ elevations in both astrocytic somata and processes. An exogenous astrocytic Gq G protein-coupled receptor was resistant to scaling, suggesting that the alterations in astrocyte Ca²⁺ signaling result from changes in activity of the surface mGluRs rather than a change in intracellular G protein signaling molecules. These findings suggest that astrocytes actively detect shifts in neuronal firing rates and adjust their receptor signaling accordingly. This type of long-term plasticity in astrocytes resembles neuronal homeostatic plasticity and might be important to ensure an optimal or expected level of input from neurons.

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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
France 1 2%
Unknown 49 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 35%
Researcher 13 25%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 4 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 44%
Neuroscience 15 29%
Unspecified 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 5 10%
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 November 2012.
All research outputs
#18,321,703
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,900
of 193,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,106
of 178,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,463
of 4,728 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 178,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,728 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.