In vivo modulation of network activity drives the nanoscale reorganisation of axo-axonic synapses at the axon initial segment
Compans, B.; Mastrolia, V.; Lenherr, C.; Burrone, J.
Show abstract
Chemical synapses control their strength through the nanoscale clustering of postsynaptic receptors into sub-synaptic domains (SSDs). Despite their importance in synapse function, the properties and plasticity of these domains are not well understood in vivo, particularly in inhibitory synapses. We used direct Stochastic Optical Resolution Microscopy (dSTORM) to show that Gephyrin, the main inhibitory receptor scaffold protein, is organised into SSDs in vivo, with distinct arrangements depending on their sub-cellular location and presynaptic partner. Furthermore, chronic chemogenetic increases in cortical activity caused a reduction in Gephyrin SSD volume specifically in axo-axonic, but not axo-dendritic, synapses. Functionally, this resulted in a weakening of axo-axonic contacts. We show that the nanoscale arrangement of synapses in the brain is plastic and used to fine-tune synaptic gain in vivo.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Differential nanoscale organization of excitatory synapses onto excitatory vs inhibitory neurons 97%
- Fully-primed slowly-recovering vesicles mediate presynaptic LTP at neocortical neurons 96%
- Clathrin light chain diversity regulates membrane deformation in vitro and synaptic vesicle formation in vivo 96%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- The noncoding circular RNA circHomer1 regulates synaptic development and experience-dependent plasticity in mouse visual cortex 95%
- Multi-Scale LM/EM Neuronal Imaging from Brain to Synapse with a Tissue Clearing Method, ScaleSF 94%
- The Temporal Pattern of Synaptic Activation Determines the Longevity of Structural Plasticity at Single Dendritic Spines 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.