4.8 Article

Pathway-Specific Feedforward Circuits between Thalamus and Neocortex Revealed by Selective Optical Stimulation of Axons

Journal

NEURON
Volume 65, Issue 2, Pages 230-245

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.12.025

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [NS25983, NS05043, 1R01EB007401-01]
  2. BIBS
  3. National Science Foundation [0725740]
  4. DOE [ER46387]
  5. Directorate For Engineering
  6. Div Of Electrical, Commun & Cyber Sys [0725740] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Emerging Frontiers & Multidisciplinary Activities
  8. Directorate For Engineering [937848] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Thalamocortical and corticothalamic pathways mediate bidirectional communication between the thalamus and neocortex. These pathways are entwined, making their study challenging. Here we used lentiviruses to express channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2), a light-sensitive cation channel, in either thalamocortical or corticothalamic projection cells. Infection occurred only locally, but efferent axons and their terminals expressed ChR2 strongly, allowing selective optical activation of each pathway. Laser stimulation of ChR2-expressing thalamocortical axons/terminals; evoked robust synaptic responses in cortical excitatory cells and fast-spiking (FS) inhibitory interneurons, but only weak responses in somatostatin-containing interneurons. Strong FS cell activation led to feedforward inhibition in all cortical neuron types, including FS cells. Corticothalamic stimulation excited thalamic relay cells and inhibitory neurons of the thalamic reticular nucleus (TRN). TRN activation triggered inhibition in relay cells but not in TRN neurons. Thus, a major difference between thalamocortical and corticothalamic processing was the extent to which feedforward inhibitory neurons were themselves engaged by feedforward inhibition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available