↓ Skip to main content

The Diversity of Cortical Inhibitory Synapses

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neural Circuits, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Readers on

mendeley
315 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
The Diversity of Cortical Inhibitory Synapses
Published in
Frontiers in Neural Circuits, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fncir.2016.00027
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshiyuki Kubota, Fuyuki Karube, Masaki Nomura, Yasuo Kawaguchi

Abstract

The most typical and well known inhibitory action in the cortical microcircuit is a strong inhibition on the target neuron by axo-somatic synapses. However, it has become clear that synaptic inhibition in the cortex is much more diverse and complicated. Firstly, at least ten or more inhibitory non-pyramidal cell subtypes engage in diverse inhibitory functions to produce the elaborate activity characteristic of the different cortical states. Each distinct non-pyramidal cell subtype has its own independent inhibitory function. Secondly, the inhibitory synapses innervate different neuronal domains, such as axons, spines, dendrites and soma, and their inhibitory postsynaptic potential (IPSP) size is not uniform. Thus, cortical inhibition is highly complex, with a wide variety of anatomical and physiological modes. Moreover, the functional significance of the various inhibitory synapse innervation styles and their unique structural dynamic behaviors differ from those of excitatory synapses. In this review, we summarize our current understanding of the inhibitory mechanisms of the cortical microcircuit.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 315 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belarus 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 307 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 82 26%
Researcher 63 20%
Student > Master 38 12%
Student > Bachelor 24 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 6%
Other 41 13%
Unknown 47 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 139 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 63 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 4%
Computer Science 6 2%
Other 21 7%
Unknown 53 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#4,456,354
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#269
of 1,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,428
of 298,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#8
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
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 298,657 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.