4.8 Review

Silencing Neurons: Tools, Applications, and Experimental Constraints

期刊

NEURON
卷 95, 期 3, 页码 504-529

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2017.06.050

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Research Council [ERC-2016-StG 714762]
  2. German Research Foundation [SPP 1926, FOR 2419]
  3. Israel Ministry of Science Technology and Space
  4. Israel Science Foundation (ISF) [1351-12]
  5. European Research Council (ERC-StG) [337637]
  6. Human Frontier Science Program
  7. I-CORE program of the Planning and Budgeting Committee
  8. Israel Science Foundation [51/11]
  9. Gertrude and Philip Nollman Career Development Chair
  10. Adelis Foundation
  11. Candice Appleton Family Trust
  12. Lord Sieff of Brimpton Memorial Fund
  13. Koshland Foundation
  14. European Research Council (ERC) [337637] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reversible silencing of neuronal activity is a powerful approach for isolating the roles of specific neuronal populations in circuit dynamics and behavior. In contrast with neuronal excitation, for which the majority of studies have used a limited number of optogenetic and chemogenetic tools, the number of genetically encoded tools used for inhibition of neuronal activity has vastly expanded. Silencing strategies vary widely in their mechanism of action and in their spatial and temporal scales. Although such manipulations are commonly applied, the design and interpretation of neuronal silencing experiments present unique challenges, both technically and conceptually. Here, we review the most commonly used tools for silencing neuronal activity and provide an in-depth analysis of their mechanism of action and utility for particular experimental applications. We further discuss the considerations that need to be given to experimental design, analysis, and interpretation of collected data. Finally, we discuss future directions for the development of new silencing approaches in neuroscience.

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

4.8
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