2019
DOI: 10.1523/jneurosci.1395-19.2019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Heterosynaptic GABABReceptor Function within Feedforward Microcircuits Gates Glutamatergic Transmission in the Nucleus Accumbens Core

Abstract: Complex circuit interactions within the nucleus accumbens (NAc) facilitate goal-directed behavior. Medium spiny neurons (MSNs) mediate NAc output by projecting to functionally divergent brain regions, a property conferred, in part, by the differential projection patterns of D1-and D2 dopamine receptor-expressing MSNs. Glutamatergic afferents to the NAc direct MSN output by recruiting feedforward inhibitory microcircuits comprised of parvalbumin (PV)-expressing interneurons (INs). Furthermore, the GABA B hetero… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
30
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
1
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To determine if PV-INs [PV(+)-INs] in the NAc core differ from D1(+)- and D1(−)-expressing MSNs in functional CP-AMPAR content, we prepared acute ex vivo brain slices from PV Cre -tdTomato(tdT) f/-STOP-fl (PV tdT ) and D1tdTomato transgenic reporter mice ( Figure 1A ). This strategy allows PV(+) and D1(+) cells in the NAc to be visualized ex vivo , as described previously ( Scudder et al, 2018 ; Manz et al, 2019 ). To confirm that tdT(+) cells in PV tdT mice were PV-INs, we performed current-clamp recordings in tdT(+) cells to determine if tdT(+) cells displayed a fast-spiking electrophysiological profile.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To determine if PV-INs [PV(+)-INs] in the NAc core differ from D1(+)- and D1(−)-expressing MSNs in functional CP-AMPAR content, we prepared acute ex vivo brain slices from PV Cre -tdTomato(tdT) f/-STOP-fl (PV tdT ) and D1tdTomato transgenic reporter mice ( Figure 1A ). This strategy allows PV(+) and D1(+) cells in the NAc to be visualized ex vivo , as described previously ( Scudder et al, 2018 ; Manz et al, 2019 ). To confirm that tdT(+) cells in PV tdT mice were PV-INs, we performed current-clamp recordings in tdT(+) cells to determine if tdT(+) cells displayed a fast-spiking electrophysiological profile.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it is possible that inhibition of GABAergic interneurons in the NAc of Shank3B -/animals, by either NpHR-induced reductions in FF inhibition or JZL184 application, was sufficient to restore social function. One possible way that JZL184 could improve SI is via inhibition of glutamatergic BLA synapses and GABAergic fast-spiking interneurons (FSIs) onto MSNs, both of which are regulated by CB1 receptors at the presynaptic level ( Figure 10) (26,65,66). Increases in 2-AG may therefore inhibit activation of NAc FSIs in response to BLA stimulation as well as inhibit GABAergic release from FSIs.…”
Section: Electrophysiologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering that our recent study on the mechanism underlying DBS of the subthalamic nucleus revealed that DBS induces an increase in histamine release in the subthalamic nucleus to alleviate Parkinsonian motor deficits ( 20 ), we speculate that the DBS–NAc core may also induce histamine release in the NAc core to activate the presynaptic H3 receptor, inhibit glutamatergic afferent inputs from the prefrontal cortex, and subsequently ameliorate anxiety- and obsessive-compulsive-like behaviors. Unlike presynaptic GABA ( 48 , 49 ), adenosine ( 48 ), or serotonin ( 50 ) receptors functioning to modulate both excitatory and inhibitory synaptic transmission in NAc, the presynaptic histamine H3 receptor, selectively acting on glutamatergic neurotransmission, may be a better target for the treatment of glutamatergic dysfunction in NAc. Notably, several agonists for the H3 receptor, including RAMH and its prodrugs, have entered clinical trials and proved safe ( 51 , 52 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%