2017
DOI: 10.1038/nrn.2017.56
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Functional consequences of neuropeptide and small-molecule co-transmission

Abstract: Colocalization of small-molecule and neuropeptide transmitters is common throughout the nervous system of all animals. The resulting co-transmission, which provides conjoint ionotropic (‘classical’) and metabotropic (‘modulatory’) actions, includes neuropeptide-specific aspects that are qualitatively different from those that result from metabotropic actions of small-molecule transmitter release. Here, we focus on the flexibility afforded to microcircuits by such co-transmission, using examples from various ne… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

7
293
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 266 publications
(301 citation statements)
references
References 159 publications
(278 reference statements)
7
293
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This could modulate the transmission of pain signals. Neuropeptides are inactivated by extracellular peptidases upon release apart from binding to their cognate receptors because in contrast to small molecule neurotransmitters, there are no reuptake mechanisms for the former [32,33]. An increase, thereafter, between 6 and 12 h was likely the result of re-synthesis of this neuropeptide.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This could modulate the transmission of pain signals. Neuropeptides are inactivated by extracellular peptidases upon release apart from binding to their cognate receptors because in contrast to small molecule neurotransmitters, there are no reuptake mechanisms for the former [32,33]. An increase, thereafter, between 6 and 12 h was likely the result of re-synthesis of this neuropeptide.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, prior to Jan and Jan's 1982 paper, these concepts were not yet fully established at the level of identified neurons and synapses. The fact that cotransmission, in particular, was already evident nearly four decades ago likely is surprising to some because, despite a smattering of subsequent studies (Adams and O'Shea, 1983;Sigvardt et al, 1986;Bishop et al, 1987;Whim and Lloyd, 1989;Kupfermann, 1991;Nusbaum et al, 2001), it has only been during the past 10 years or so that the functional consequences of co-transmission have become a growth industry (Vaaga et al, 2014;Nusbaum et al, 2017).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While this number of citations may not seem impressive by the standards of recent high-profile publications, the research community was considerably smaller in the 1980s. Moreover, this paper continues to be acknowledged today (in fact, 2016 was the first year since 1982 when it garnered no citations, but there will be at least two citations in 2017) as seminal to the now-burgeoning field of peptidergic (co)transmission, a process which is clearly integral to nervous system function in all animals (Nässel, 2009;van den Pol, 2012;Nusbaum et al, 2017).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations