↓ Skip to main content

Spike-Timing Dependence of Structural Plasticity Explains Cooperative Synapse Formation in the Neocortex

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Spike-Timing Dependence of Structural Plasticity Explains Cooperative Synapse Formation in the Neocortex
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002689
Pubmed ID
Authors

Moritz Deger, Moritz Helias, Stefan Rotter, Markus Diesmann

Abstract

Structural plasticity governs the long-term development of synaptic connections in the neocortex. While the underlying processes at the synapses are not fully understood, there is strong evidence that a process of random, independent formation and pruning of excitatory synapses can be ruled out. Instead, there must be some cooperation between the synaptic contacts connecting a single pre- and postsynaptic neuron pair. So far, the mechanism of cooperation is not known. Here we demonstrate that local correlation detection at the postsynaptic dendritic spine suffices to explain the synaptic cooperation effect, without assuming any hypothetical direct interaction pathway between the synaptic contacts. Candidate biomolecular mechanisms for dendritic correlation detection have been identified previously, as well as for structural plasticity based thereon. By analyzing and fitting of a simple model, we show that spike-timing correlation dependent structural plasticity, without additional mechanisms of cross-synapse interaction, can reproduce the experimentally observed distributions of numbers of synaptic contacts between pairs of neurons in the neocortex. Furthermore, the model yields a first explanation for the existence of both transient and persistent dendritic spines and allows to make predictions for future experiments.

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 %
Germany 5 5%
United Kingdom 4 4%
Switzerland 2 2%
France 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 85 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 25%
Student > Master 11 11%
Professor 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 8 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 26%
Neuroscience 24 24%
Computer Science 12 12%
Physics and Astronomy 8 8%
Mathematics 7 7%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 10 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 27 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#8,211
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,589
of 188,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#104
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 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 8,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. 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 188,976 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.