AboutNeuron TypesElectrophysiology PropertiesArticlesFAQsData/APIGet Involved

Article: Tonic mGluR5/CB1-dependent suppression of inhibition as a pathophysiological hallmark in the striatum of mice carrying a mutant form of huntingtin.

Full Text (publisher's website) ; Article Metadata ; Article Data (extracted)
Dvorzhak A; Semtner M; Faber DS; Grantyn R
J. Physiol. (Lond.), 2013

Table 3.  Similar differences between WT and CAR in R6/2 and Q175
PropertyPercentage difference, CAR vs. WT
  1. All evaluated parameters in this table showed statistically significant differences between WT and CAR. Parameters that were not different (for instance, quantal size Q) are omitted. The percent difference is the difference between WT and CAR mean values in % of WT mean. Note that in Q175 the HD-related differences in membrane potential, input resistance, rheobasic current and the asynchrony index were less pronounced. For abbreviations see list on Introduction page.

SON properties and network activity
 Membrane potential−12.9−7.2
 Whole-cell input resistance116.767.0
 Rheobasic current−48.7−26.5
 Half-effective current−41.2−20.0
 Maximal AP frequency−10.1−11.1
 sIPSC frequency (KCl)427.1
 sIPSC frequency (CsCl)404.0
Unitary synaptic connections
 Mean eIPSC amplitude−31.9−34.0
 Maximal eIPSC amplitude−31.4−39.9
 P (mean eIPSC/maximal eIPSC)−7.6−12.1
 eIPSC failure rate122.2146.3
 eIPSC CV16.523.0
 PPR (eEPSC2/eEPSC1)14.216.5
 Asynchronicity index (100 Hz test)151.154.8
 m (mean eIPSC/Q)−37.4−37.5

Report miscurated data

Inferred neuron-electrophysiology data values

Neuron Type Neuron Description Ephys Prop Extracted Value Standardized Value Content Source