Cell-specific restoration of stimulus preference after monocular deprivation in the visual cortex

Science

Volumn 352, Issue 6291, 2016, Pages 1319-1322

  Rose, Tobias ^a   Jaepel, Juliane ^a   Hübener, Mark ^a   Bonhoeffer, Tobias ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE OF NEUROBIOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELLS AND CELL COMPONENTS; EYE; PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE; RODENT; VISUAL CUE;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; BINOCULAR VISION; EYE DOMINANCE; MOLECULAR IMAGING; MONOCULAR DEPRIVATION; MOUSE; NERVE CELL PLASTICITY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STIMULUS RESPONSE; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL EVOKED POTENTIAL; VISUAL ORIENTATION; VISUAL STIMULATION; ANIMAL; CYTOLOGY; GENETICS; NERVE CELL; NEUROIMAGING; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROMOTER REGION; SENSORY DEPRIVATION; SINGLE CELL ANALYSIS;

CALCIUM; CALCIUM CALMODULIN DEPENDENT PROTEIN KINASE II; PROTEIN; RUBY-EYE 2 PROTEIN, MOUSE;

ANIMALS; CALCIUM; CALCIUM-CALMODULIN-DEPENDENT PROTEIN KINASE TYPE 2; DOMINANCE, OCULAR; MICE; NEUROIMAGING; NEURONS; PROMOTER REGIONS, GENETIC; PROTEINS; SENSORY DEPRIVATION; SINGLE-CELL ANALYSIS; VISUAL CORTEX;

EID: 84975123258     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.aad3358     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. T. N. Wiesel, D. H. Hubel, J. Neurophysiol. 26, 1003-1017 (1963).
2. A. Kirkwood, M. C. Rioult, M. F. Bear, Nature 381, 526-528 (1996).
3. S. Le Vay, T. N. Wiesel, D. H. Hubel, J. Comp. Neurol. 191, 1-51 (1980).
4. S. B. Hofer, T. D. Mrsic-Flogel, T. Bonhoeffer, M. Hübener, Nature 457, 313-317 (2009).
5. S. J. Kuhlman et al., Nature 501, 543-546 (2013).
6. J. A. Gordon, M. P. Stryker, J. Neurosci. 16, 3274-3286 (1996).
7. N. B. Sawtell et al., Neuron 38, 977-985 (2003).
8. U. Matthies, J. Balog, K. Lehmann, J. Neurosci. 33, 11774-11778 (2013).
9. F. Greifzu et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 1150-1155 (2014).
10. T. D. Mrsic-Flogel et al., Neuron 54, 961-972 (2007).
11. S. B. Hofer, T. D. Mrsic-Flogel, T. Bonhoeffer, M. Hübener, Nat. Neurosci. 9, 127-132 (2006).
12. M. Kaneko, J. L. Hanover, P. M. England, M. P. Stryker, Nat. Neurosci. 11, 497-504 (2008).
13. D. van Versendaal et al., Neuron 74, 374-383 (2012).
14. L. Mioche, W. Singer, J. Neurophysiol. 62, 185-197 (1989).
15. T. E. Krahe, A. E. Medina, R. E. de Bittencourt-Navarrete, R. J. Colello, A. S. Ramoa, Neuron 48, 329-343 (2005).
16. T. N. Wiesel, D. H. Hubel, J. Neurophysiol. 28, 1060-1072 (1965).
17. D. S. Kim, T. Bonhoeffer, Nature 370, 370-372 (1994).
18. T.-W. Chen et al., Nature 499, 295-300 (2013).
19. A. J. Lam et al., Nat. Methods 9, 1005-1012 (2012).
20. N. Mataga, Y. Mizuguchi, T. K. Hensch, Neuron 44, 1031-1041 (2004).
21. J. L. Chen et al., Neuron 74, 361-373 (2012).
22. K. L. Villa et al., Neuron 89, 756-769 (2016).
23. D. J. Margolis et al., Nat. Neurosci. 15, 1539-1546 (2012).
24. A. J. G. D. Holtmaat et al., Neuron 45, 279-291 (2005).
25. B. Doiron, A. Litwin-Kumar, R. Rosenbaum, G. K. Ocker, K. Josić, Nat. Neurosci. 19, 383-393 (2016).
26. M. N. Shadlen, W. T. Newsome, J. Neurosci. 18, 3870-3896 (1998).
27. G. Rothschild, I. Nelken, A. Mizrahi, Nat. Neurosci. 13, 353-360 (2010).
28. L. Cossell et al., Nature 518, 399-403 (2015).
29. A. Luczak, P. Barthó, K. D. Harris, Neuron 62, 413-425 (2009).
30. S. Fusi, P. J. Drew, L. F. Abbott, Neuron 45, 599-611 (2005).
31. A. Antonini, M. Fagiolini, M. P. Stryker, J. Neurosci. 19, 4388-4406 (1999).