↓ Skip to main content

Synaptic polarity of the interneuron circuit controlling C. elegans locomotion

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Synaptic polarity of the interneuron circuit controlling C. elegans locomotion
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2013.00128
Pubmed ID
Authors

Franciszek Rakowski, Jagan Srinivasan, Paul W. Sternberg, Jan Karbowski

Abstract

Caenorhabditis elegans is the only animal for which a detailed neural connectivity diagram has been constructed. However, synaptic polarities in this diagram, and thus, circuit functions are largely unknown. Here, we deciphered the likely polarities of seven pre-motor neurons implicated in the control of worm's locomotion, using a combination of experimental and computational tools. We performed single and multiple laser ablations in the locomotor interneuron circuit and recorded times the worms spent in forward and backward locomotion. We constructed a theoretical model of the locomotor circuit and searched its all possible synaptic polarity combinations and sensory input patterns in order to find the best match to the timing data. The optimal solution is when either all or most of the interneurons are inhibitory and forward interneurons receive the strongest input, which suggests that inhibition governs the dynamics of the locomotor interneuron circuit. From the five pre-motor interneurons, only AVB and AVD are equally likely to be excitatory, i.e., they have probably similar number of inhibitory and excitatory connections to distant targets. The method used here has a general character and thus can be also applied to other neural systems consisting of small functional networks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Greece 1 1%
Unknown 66 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 28%
Researcher 17 25%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Master 5 7%
Professor 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 7 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 32%
Neuroscience 11 16%
Physics and Astronomy 8 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 10%
Engineering 6 9%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 9 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 March 2014.
All research outputs
#7,166,557
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#334
of 1,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,014
of 290,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#24
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,475 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 290,780 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.