↓ Skip to main content

Optogenetic stimulation of cholinergic brainstem neurons during focal limbic seizures: Effects on cortical physiology

Overview of attention for article published in Epilepsia, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Optogenetic stimulation of cholinergic brainstem neurons during focal limbic seizures: Effects on cortical physiology
Published in
Epilepsia, November 2015
DOI 10.1111/epi.13220
Pubmed ID
Authors

Moran Furman, Qiong Zhan, Cian McCafferty, Benjamin A Lerner, Joshua E Motelow, Jin Meng, Chanthia Ma, Gordon F Buchanan, Ilana B Witten, Karl Deisseroth, Jessica A Cardin, Hal Blumenfeld

Abstract

Focal temporal lobe seizures often cause impaired cortical function and loss of consciousness. Recent work suggests that the mechanism for depressed cortical function during focal seizures may depend on decreased subcortical cholinergic arousal, which leads to a sleep-like state of cortical slow-wave activity. To test this hypothesis, we sought to directly activate subcortical cholinergic neurons during focal limbic seizures to determine the effects on cortical function. Here we used an optogenetic approach to selectively stimulate cholinergic brainstem neurons in the pedunculopontine tegmental nucleus during focal limbic seizures induced in a lightly anesthetized rat model. We found an increase in cortical gamma activity and a decrease in delta activity in response to cholinergic stimulation. These findings support the mechanistic role of reduced subcortical cholinergic arousal in causing cortical dysfunction during seizures. Through further work, electrical or optogenetic stimulation of subcortical arousal networks may ultimately lead to new treatments aimed at preventing cortical dysfunction during seizures.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 98 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 9%
Professor 8 8%
Other 7 7%
Other 23 23%
Unknown 18 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 34 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 15%
Engineering 3 3%
Unspecified 3 3%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 21 21%
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 04 November 2015.
All research outputs
#18,407,102
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Epilepsia
#4,919
of 5,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,211
of 285,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Epilepsia
#56
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 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 5,348 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 285,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.