4.7 Article

Pathophysiological signatures of functional connectomics in parkinsonian and dyskinetic striatal microcircuits

期刊

NEUROBIOLOGY OF DISEASE
卷 91, 期 -, 页码 347-361

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.nbd.2016.02.023

关键词

Striatal microcircuit; Network properties; Parkinsonian circuit; Dyskinetic circuit; L-DOPA

资金

  1. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia (CONACyT Mexico) [154131, 260866]
  2. Frontera-CONACyT grant [57]
  3. Direccion General de Asuntos del Personal Academic of Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (DGAPA-UNAM) [IN-202914, IN-202814, IN-211616]
  4. CONACyT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A challenge in neuroscience is to integrate the cellular and system levels. For instance, we still do not know how a few dozen neurons organize their activity and relations in a microcircuit or module of histological scale. By using network theory and Ca2+ imaging with single-neuron resolution we studied the way in which striatal microcircuits of dozens of cells orchestrate their activity. In addition, control and diseased striatal tissues were compared in rats. In the control tissue, functional connectomics revealed small-world, scale-free and hierarchical network properties. These properties were lost during pathological conditions in ways that could be quantitatively analyzed. Decorticated striatal circuits disclosed that corticostriatal interactions depend on privileged connections with a set of highly connected neurons or hubs. In the 6-OHDA model of Parkinson's disease there was a decrease in hubs number; but the ones that remained were linked to dominant network states. L-DOPA induced dyskinesia provoked a loss in the hierarchical structure of the circuit. All these conditions conferred distinct temporal sequences to circuit activity. Temporal sequences appeared as particular signatures of disease process thus bringing the possibility of a future quantitative pathophysiology at a histological scale. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据