↓ Skip to main content

Bidirectional Control of Reversal in a Dual Action Task by Direct and Indirect Pathway Activation in the Dorsolateral Striatum in Mice

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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 Control of Reversal in a Dual Action Task by Direct and Indirect Pathway Activation in the Dorsolateral Striatum in Mice
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00256
Pubmed ID
Authors

Muriel Laurent, Jean-François De Backer, Danie Rial, Serge N. Schiffmann, Alban de Kerchove d'Exaerde

Abstract

The striatum is a key brain structure involved in the processing of cognitive flexibility, which results from the balance between the flexibility demanded for novel learning of motor actions and the inflexibility required to preserve previously learned actions. In particular, the dorsolateral portion of the striatum (DLS) is engaged in the learning of action sequence. This process is temporally driven by fine adjustments in the function of the two main neuronal populations of the striatum, known as the direct pathway medium spiny neurons (dMSNs) and indirect pathway medium spiny neurons (iMSNs). Here, using optogenetics, behavioral, and electrophysiological tools, we addressed the relative role of both neuronal populations in the acquisition of a reversal dual action sequence in the DLS. While the channelrhodopsin-induced activation of dMSNs and iMSNs of the DLS did not induce changes in the learning rate of the sequence, the specific activation of the dMSNs of the DLS facilitated the acquisition of a reversal dual action sequence; the activation of iMSNs induced a significant deficit in the acquisition of the same task. Taken together our results indicate an antagonistic relationship between dMSNs and iMSNs on the acquisition of a reversal dual action sequence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Master 6 15%
Other 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 30%
Psychology 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 7 18%
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 22 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,579,736
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,622
of 3,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#329,007
of 440,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#54
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 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 3,201 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. 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 440,922 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 58 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.