The enigmatic function of chandelier cells
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
FOCUSED REVIEW
published: 08 December 2010
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2010.00201
The enigmatic function of chandelier cells
Alan R. Woodruff 1*, Stewart A. Anderson 2 and Rafael Yuste1
1
Department of Biological Sciences, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
2
Department of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY, USA
Chandelier (or axo-axonic) cells are one of the most distinctive GABAergic interneurons in the
brain.Their exquisite target specificity for the axon initial segment of pyramidal neurons, together
with their GABAergic nature, long suggested the possibility that they provide the ultimate
inhibitory control of pyramidal neuron output. Recent findings indicate that their function may
be more complicated, and perhaps more interesting, than initially believed. Here we review
these recent developments and their implications. We focus in particular on whether chandelier
cells may provide a depolarizing, excitatory effect on pyramidal neuron output, in addition to a
powerful inhibition.
Keywords: GABAergic depolarization, excitation, cortex, axon initial segment
Introduction arborizations of different interneurons reflects
The mammalian brain is an organ of seemingly their subcellular target specificity, which in turn
impossible complexity. There are billions of neu- has important implications for their function.
rons, trillions of synaptic connections, and prob- Indeed, a common delineation exists between
ably hundreds of distinct cell types, each of which interneurons targeting dendritic domains, such as
is presumably specialized to perform distinct neocortical Martinotti and double bouquet cells,
Edited by:
tasks. A crucial step in addressing the underly- and those targeting axo-somatic domains, such
David Linden, Johns Hopkins University,
USA ing logic in the design of the brain is therefore as chandelier and basket cells (Markram et al.,
Reviewed by:
identifying the function, or functions, of a given 2004). Whereas dendrite-targeting neurons may
Stephen R. Williams, University of neuronal class. be more suited to modify and gate incoming exci-
Cambridge, UK The most obvious separation in neuron func- tatory input (Murayama et al., 2009), axo-somatic
Miles A. Whittington, Newcastle tion within cortical structures is between exci- interneurons are likely to exhibit a greater impact
University, UK tatory, glutamatergic pyramidal (or principal) on the direct output of the postsynaptic neuron
*Correspondence: neurons and inhibitory GABAergic interneurons. (Marr, 1970; Miles et al., 1996).
Information is presumably carried and processed Here we focus on attempting to understand
by pyramidal (Pyr) neurons, whose connections the chandelier cell (ChCs), an interneuron type
traverse cortical layers and regions. Interneurons, that exemplifies the target specificity of cortical
by contrast, are typically considered to project interneurons and thus potentially illustrates the
only locally, and provide a means of controlling purposeful design of neuronal circuits. ChCs
Alan R. Woodruff received his Ph.D. the excitation provided by pyramidal neurons. It were “missed” by Cajal and Lorente and were first
from the University of Queensland under
the mentorship of Prof. Pankaj Sah,
is, of course, not that simple. It turns out that a identified by Szentagothai and, independently, by
where he studied the local circuit vast heterogeneity exists amongst the GABAergic Jones (Jones, 1975; Szentagothai, 1975). The defin-
properties of GABAergic neurons in the interneurons, which constitute ∼20% of all cor- ing morphological characteristic of ChCs is the
basolateral amygdala. His current tical neurons. This heterogeneity has long been array of short, vertically oriented rows of terminal
research, at Columbia University with recognized (Ramón y Cajal, 1899; Lorente de Nó, boutons, which resemble candlesticks. Originally
Prof. Rafael Yuste, is focused on
elucidating the function of cortical
1922), and one of the first aspects of this heteroge- believed to contact the apical dendrite of pyrami-
chandelier cells. neity to be noticed, their “short axons,” is likely to dal cells (Szentagothai, 1975), these axonal car-
aw2343@columbia.edu be one of the most important – the distinct axonal tridges were later shown via electron microscopic
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 1
Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function
Chandelier cell reconstructions of Golgi-stained specimens to nomenclature that is used interchangeably. This
GABAergic interneuron whose exclusive exclusively contact the axon initial segment (AIS) highly stereotyped and visually striking appear-
postsynaptic target is the axon initial
segment of pyramidal neurons.
of pyramidal neurons (Figure 1C; Somogyi, 1977; ance of ChCs facilitated early studies regarding
Fairen and Valverde, 1980). Because of this, chan- their location, abundance, and neurochemical
delier neurons were renamed “axo-axonic cells,” a features. ChCs are present in all cortical layers,
A B
L1
L2/3
L4
100 µm
C D 20 mV
400 pA
100 ms
10 µm
ChC
BC
E F
ChC BC
-58 mV -59 mV 0.5 mV Record ChC Record BC 50 mV
20 ms ChC 10 ms
-66 mV -67 mV
BC
NBQX
-73 mV -72 mV
Pyr
5 pA
-81 mV -85 mV
(rest) (rest)
3.5 ms
-91 mV -90 mV
Figure 1 | Characteristic features of chandelier cells. (A) Neurolucida reconstruction of a layer 2/3 chandelier cell. Cell
body and dendrites are in blue, axon in red. Several vertically oriented axonal segments are visible, and are the
characteristic morphological feature of ChCs. The long descending axon (arrowhead) reached and arborized in layer 6, but
has been digitally truncated. (B) Parvalbumin immunoreactivity of a ChC. A GFP-labeled ChC (right panel, arrow)
co-expresses PV (left panel, arrow). (C) Biocytin-filled ChC forms a row of cartridge synapses (arrowheads) on the AIS of a
biocytin-filled cortical pyramidal neuron (axon marked by white arrow). (D) Chandelier and basket cells have characteristic
responses to threshold current injection. Both cells exhibit the fast-spiking phenotype at higher current intensities (right
panel, 2× threshold illustrated). (E) In cortical layer 2/3 pyramids, EGABA differs at ChC–Pyr and BC–Pyr synapses. (F) ChCs
can initiate polysynaptic events. Activation of a GABAergic ChC evokes a response in a simultaneously recorded basket
cell. The response (left panel) is sensitive to the AMPA receptor antagonist NBQX, has a disynaptic latency, and is
observed in a cell type (BC) that receives no direct synapses from ChCs. Schematic of disynaptic circuit is shown in right
panel. (B, D and E) modified, from Woodruff et al. (2009).
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 2Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function
most abundantly in layer 2/3 (DeFelipe et al., and resulted in ChCs being less receptive to
1985; Inda et al., 2007). Although originally ascending sensory input. However, ChCs mark-
described in neocortex (Szentagothai, 1975), edly increased their output during conditions of
ChCs have also been found in the CA3 (Sik et al., high network activity, implying that ChCs may
1993), CA1 (Somogyi et al., 1983) and dentate be recruited to dampen excessive excitation.
gyrus (Soriano and Frotscher, 1989) regions of the Until recently, therefore, all evidence seemed to
hippocampus, and in the amygdala (McDonald, suggest that ChCs were inhibitory GABAergic
1982). The expression of GABA (Somogyi et al., neurons, unique in their high degree of spatial
1985), parvalbumin (PV; DeFelipe et al., 1989), target selectivity, but otherwise not particularly
and corticotropin-releasing factor (Lewis et al., remarkable in comparison to other GABAergic
1989) provides a neurochemical identity to these cell types.
neurons (Figure 1B).
Despite this knowledge, it has been signifi- Are chandelier cells depolarizing?
cantly more difficult to ascertain the physiologi- In 2006, a controversial paper appeared demon-
cal properties of ChCs, and more particularly strating an excitatory effect of cortical layer 2/3
their putative functions. This is in part due to chandelier cell activation (Szabadics et al., 2006).
the rarity of ChCs and the fact that common Three pieces of evidence were presented in sup-
markers label both chandelier and the much port of this. Firstly, disynaptic, glutamatergic exci-
more abundant basket cells. To date there is cur- tatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs) could be
rently no known unique ChC marker. Although elicited following a single spike in the chandelier
a variety of transgenic mouse lines now exist in cell – an effect attributed to direct recruitment
which various populations of interneurons are of pyramidal neurons by ChCs (Figure 1F). But
fluorescently labeled, including PV-positive neu- for direct recruitment of a pyramidal neuron to
rons (Meyer et al., 2002; Chattopadhyaya et al., occur with such a short latency, the ChC synapse
2004), ChCs have been recorded from much less at the AIS had to be depolarizing, a condition not
frequently than have the more numerous basket previously considered for this particular synapse.
cells. Physiologically, both ChCs and BCs fire Secondly, the authors confirmed that the ChC
high frequency, minimally adapting trains of synapse was indeed depolarizing, with the GABAA
narrow action potentials – a fast-spiking pheno- reversal potential (EGABA) significantly elevated
type. In the cortex, BCs and ChCs were believed above the neuron’s resting potential (Vrest), and
indistinguishable on physiological grounds above that of basket cell synapses (Figure 1E).
(Kawaguchi, 1995; Gonzalez-Burgos et al., 2005), Importantly, EGABA in this study was measured
while in the hippocampus, ChCs were reported using the antibiotic gramicidin in the postsynap-
to exhibit a greater degree of spike frequency tic pipette of a paired recording. Gramicidin forms
adaptation than BCs (Han, 1994). Thus in most membrane pores that allow exclusive exchange of
cases, unequivocal identification of a ChC was monovalent cations and small uncharged mol-
only possible following post-recording recov- ecules (Kyrozis and Reichling, 1995). Thus there
ery of the neuron’s morphology (Figure 1A). is no dialysis of intracellular chloride, as occurs
Whilst this is not a difficult procedure, it is not with whole-cell patching, and more physiological
routinely performed, and the number of physi- EGABA responses are recorded through the perfo-
ological and functional studies on ChCs has been rated neuronal membrane. Thirdly, immunogold
somewhat limited. labeling and electron microscopic reconstruction
The studies hinting at a functional role for demonstrated an apparent absence of the potas-
ChCs are therefore correlative rather than causa- sium-chloride cotransporter KCC2 from the AIS
tive. In vivo recordings have revealed the firing – an effect that would theoretically lead to less
pattern of hippocampal ChCs during various extrusion of intracellular chloride and lead to the
network states (Klausberger et al., 2003; Tukker depolarized EGABA reported.
et al., 2007), showing that ChCs fire antiphase Thus, a powerful form of excitation had been
to pyramidal neurons during theta activity, and demonstrated for a neuron previously believed –
fire immediately prior to pyramidal neuron based on the strategic location of its GABAergic
activation during sharp-wave-associated ripples synapses – to exert a powerful form of inhibition.
Gramicidin (Klausberger et al., 2003). Perhaps a more direct The Szabadics data did not exclude an inhibitory
Antibiotic that forms membrane functional role was suggested by whole-cell action of ChCs, but rather added an excitatory
channels impermeable to chloride.
recordings from ChCs in rat somatosensory cor- role to their function. Instead of being purely
Gramicidin is useful for measuring
GABAA receptor-mediated events when tex during whisker deflection. Whisker-evoked inhibitory, ChCs now had the potential to be
maintaining an accurate GABAA stimulation revealed different sequences of affer- either inhibitory or excitatory, depending on the
reversal potential is desired. ent input compared to BCs (Zhu et al., 2004), membrane potential of the postsynaptic neuron.
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 3Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function
By extension, the overall activity state of the net- Both the Szabadics and Khirug data were
work would determine whether ChCs behaved as obtained primarily using the gramicidin per-
excitatory or inhibitory neurons. forated patch technique. Although avoiding
Further support for a depolarizing effect fol- direct chloride exchange between pipette and
lowing AIS GABAA receptor activation came when cell, gramicidin recordings may still be prone to
it was shown, again using gramicidin-based patch some error in calculating EGABA. This is because the
recordings, that dentate granule cells exhibited an chloride equilibrium potential is set by the com-
axo-somato-dendritic gradient in EGABA (Khirug bined activity of the cation chloride cotransport-
et al., 2008). The relatively depolarized axonal ers KCC2 and NKCC1 (Figure 2A). Because both
EGABA was shown to persist, to some degree, even sodium and potassium permeate the membrane
in whole-cell recordings, an effect attributed to pores created by gramicidin, pipette concentra-
efficient import of chloride by the Na-K-2Cl tions of these ions that don’t precisely match the
cotransporter NKCC1 (Khirug et al., 2008), rather physiological intracellular concentrations can
than, or perhaps in addition to, the absence of alter the activity of the transporters, and conse-
KCC2 suggested by Szabadics et al. (2006). A simi- quently shift EGABA, potentially giving a spurious
lar hyperpolarizing–depolarizing EGABA gradient reading. For example, resting [Na+]i is low relative
from dendrite to axon was shown for cortical to resting [K+]i, so slight inaccuracies in pipette
pyramidal cells of layer 2/3. [Na+] in particular may produce significant effects
A B
depolarizing
Cl– Cl– ChC
VThr
EGABA
hyperpolarizing K+ Cl–
AXON
SOMA Vrest
2 Cl– K+/Na+
K+
2 Cl–
Cl– VThr
K+/Na+ NKCC1 Nav1.6
EGABA / VNa
KCC2 GABAA
Vrest
Na+
C
small Gsyn/∆V
VA/S
Gsyn +
p(AP)
conductance
large Gsyn/∆V –
closed
+
p(AP)
–
Figure 2 | GABAergic excitation. (A) The soma and axon of a pyramidal neuron are represented. Somatic E Cl is
hyperpolarized due to the high expression of KCC2 and low expression of NKCC1. GABAA receptor activation leads to
hyperpolarization, or no net flux of ions (shunting). At the AIS, the expression of cation chloride transporters is reversed,
favoring chloride efflux and depolarization upon GABAA channel opening. Low-threshold NaV1.6 sodium channels may be
activated by the depolarization, enhancing the excitatory effect. (B) Although depolarizing, a GABAergic event may be
inhibitory, due to the conductance effect of channel opening. However, the inhibitory conductance effect (red) decays
more quickly than the excitatory membrane potential change (blue), providing at least some window of excitation (right
panel, bottom). The strength and duration of excitation (blue) and inhibition (red), denoted here as spike probability (p(AP)),
will depend on the magnitude of the conductance effect relative to the change in membrane potential. (C) The ChC
synapse is expected to be hyperpolarizing during high activity periods (red) and depolarizing under resting conditions.
Because AIS EGABA is in the range of Na+ channel activation, some depolarizations may be enhanced by sodium currents
(bottom panel).
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 4Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function
on transporter activity. For this reason, regions of of the synapse may be expected to dissipate if
the neuron where sodium exchange via NKCC1 the recording pipette is moved hundreds of
is used to set the transmembrane chloride gradi- microns away, along the somatodendritic axis.
ent, such as the axon (Khirug et al., 2008), may Consistent with this, when the recording pipette
be more prone to allowing inaccurate values of was moved to distal dendritic sites, the authors
EGABA to be recorded. Additionally, slight changes still observed unitary fields of a polarity consist-
in [Na+]i and [K+]i introduced by the recording ent with a hyperpolarizing synapse at the AIS.
pipette may alter the neuron’s resting membrane Thus even when not subjected to the possibil-
potential, causing a compensatory redistribution ity of chloride leak from the recording pipette,
of chloride ions across the membrane through the synapse was hyperpolarizing. Additionally,
passive diffusion. the concern of Cl− leaking from the electrode
These concerns were addressed using a novel, was addressed by replacing the 3 M NaCl in
non-invasive approach to recording the polarity the recording pipette with artificial cerebrospi-
of unitary GABAergic responses in hippocampal nal fluid (ACSF). This manipulation generated
CA1 (Glickfeld et al., 2009). The authors recorded similar results in the observed amplitude of the
“unitary fields” – i.e., extracellular field poten- unitary field evoked by basket synapses (Glickfeld
tials produced by activation of a single, mor- et al., 2009), which would not be expected if chlo-
phologically verified interneuron – at various ride leak was responsible for a hyperpolarizing
somatodendritic locations of the CA1 pyramidal shift in EGABA.
cell population. These recordings rely on small These data, therefore, obtained using a non-
changes in the flow of ions around the extracel- invasive technique (unitary field recordings), are
lular recording electrode. As membrane channels at odds with the data of Szabadics et al. (2006) and
open, transmembrane ion flux results in accumu- Khirug et al. (2008), both of which were obtained
lations and depletions of the permeant ions in the using the slightly more invasive gramicidin perfo-
regions proximal to the recording electrode. The rated patch technique. The polarity of effect of a
direction of current flow is indicated by the polar- GABAergic synapse is likely a major indicator and
ity of the extracellular response. Importantly, this determinant of that synapse’s functional role. The
technique does not interfere in any way with the conflicting data described above, and the differing
intracellular milieu of the postsynaptic neurons, techniques used to obtain the different results,
and in this respect represents an improvement on prompted us to investigate whether the depolar-
whole-cell and gramicidin recordings. For each izing ChC effect may be an artifact introduced by
class of interneuron recorded, targeting either gramicidin recordings.
the dendritic, somatic, or axonal compartment,
the authors found only a hyperpolarizing effect. Depolarizing chandeliers, revisited
Thus the non-invasive approach taken provided The goal of our experiments (Woodruff et al.,
no evidence for a depolarizing effect of ChCs. 2009) was to re-examine the depolarizing effect
A potential caveat with the technique arises, of cortical ChCs. For this, we first found a method
however, because Glickfeld et al. (2009) used very to routinely record from ChCs, something that to
high (molar) concentrations of chloride ions in our knowledge had not previously been achieved.
their extracellular recording electrodes, which We used Nkx2.1Cre MADM mice, a strain of
may have leaked into the surrounding neuropil. genetically engineered animals that express GFP
Typically, extracellular chloride concentrations in a subset of neocortical interneurons arising
are ∼130 mM. But by using 3 M [Cl−]o in their from the medial ganglionic eminence. This subset
extracellular pipette, the authors could poten- included ChCs, which importantly were labeled
tially have produced a ∼20-fold increase in brightly, allowing the distinctive axonal cartridges
local chloride concentrations, should any chlo- of ChCs to be identified prior to recordings. ChCs
ride leakage occur from the pipette solution. could therefore be easily targeted, particularly in
Increased extracellular chloride levels would upper layer 2/3, near the layer 1 border. We rou-
shift EGABA to hyperpolarized potentials, favor- tinely recorded from ChCs in layer 2/3 and were
ing chloride influx upon GABAA channel open- able to distinguish them from basket cells based
ing, and thus a hyperpolarizing response at the on their firing pattern and passive membrane
synapse. Could the hyperpolarizing response properties (Figure 1D; Woodruff et al., 2009).
of CA1 ChCs, which contrasts with the grami- This distinction was extremely reliable, as con-
cidin recordings in cortex and in hippocampal firmed by the subsequent anatomical identifica-
Extracellular field potentials
The electrical potential produced by
dentate granule cells, therefore be an artifact of tion of recorded cells, and obviated the need for
neurons due to transmembrane ion the recording technique? If significant chloride morphological verification in the vast majority
flux, measured extracellularly. leak did occur, any changes in [Cl−]o at the site of subsequent cases.
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 5Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function
We first performed paired recordings from Can cortical chandelier cells be
presynaptic ChCs and gramicidin-patched excitatory?
postsynaptic pyramidal cells. Our data, taken But does the axonal depolarization caused by corti-
from mouse neocortex, closely matched that of cal ChCs promote or inhibit action potential firing?
Szabadics et al. (2006) from rat neocortex, with To date, the only demonstration that ChCs are exci-
EGABA of the ChC synapse lying ∼20 mV above tatory – that they promote firing – is the suprath-
resting membrane potential, and ∼10 mV below reshold activation of pyramidal neurons reported
action potential threshold. Similar experiments by several groups (Szabadics et al., 2006; Woodruff
performed on basket cell synapses showed a pre- et al., 2006; Molnar et al., 2008; Glickfeld et al.,
dominantly shunting synapse, in which EGABA was 2009). But even this phenomenon, while clearly
typically at the neuron’s resting membrane poten- excitatory, should be interpreted cautiously.
tial. While this was consistent with the previous Firstly, nerve injury is known to result in an
gramicidin-based recordings from Szabadics upregulation of NKCC1 and a downregulation
and Khirug, the possibility remained that the of KCC2 (Hasbargen et al., 2010), both of which
depolarized axonal EGABA was simply the result would favor a depolarized EGABA. Thus the frequent
of changes in the activity of NKCC1 that may axotomies that occur during the preparation of
occur via alterations in intracellular Na+ concen- brain slices could create artificially high axonal
trations, as outlined above. We therefore com- EGABA values, leading to hyperexcitability.
plemented these recordings with a completely Secondly, chandelier-triggered activation
non-invasive technique, tight seal cell-attached of a pyramidal neuron has never been directly
recordings. Cell-attached recordings have only observed, instead being inferred by the presence
rarely been used to record synaptic potentials of a disynaptic, glutamatergic response that is
(but see Kantrowitz et al., 2005; Perkins, 2006), time-locked to the ChC spike (Figure 1F) and
and to our knowledge, only to record large- which is sensitive to the GABAA receptor antago-
amplitude, network driven events (Kantrowitz nist bicuculline. The reason for this may be merely
et al., 2005). We first showed that detecting sub- statistical, in that the chances of recording from
millivolt voltage deflections would be possible the one or two responsive pyramidal neurons are
with tight seal cell-attached recordings. Our low. Alternatively, it may be because the active
paired recordings then consistently revealed a pyramidal neurons are unhealthy, with a conse-
depolarization of the postsynaptic pyramidal cell quent increase in NKCC1 expression responsible
after ChC activation. All recordings, regardless of for the phenomenon. These neurons would not be
whether they displayed evidence of a connection targeted for patching. Bulk loading of membrane-
in the cell-attached configuration, were subse- permeable acetoxymethyl (AM) Ca2+ indicators,
quently tested in whole-cell mode for the pres- which allows action potentials to be monitored
ence of a synaptic response. We were thus able in hundreds of neurons (Yuste and Katz, 1991;
to distinguish purely shunting synapses, which Smetters et al., 1999), should facilitate the detec-
would not be detectable in cell-attached mode tion of active neurons, although we remain una-
but would be revealed upon entering whole- ware of success with this technique. This failure
cell mode, from unconnected ChC–Pyr pairs. could be due to low signal-to-noise, to unhealthy
Importantly, we never observed purely shunt- neurons not incorporating the AM Ca2+ indica-
ing or hyperpolarizing ChC–Pyr synapses. These tors, or to saturating concentrations of indicator
data supported our gramicidin recordings, and that prevent the detection of action potential-
furthermore demonstrated that the ChC-evoked induced fluorescence changes. Alternatively, the
depolarization at the AIS observed using grami- action potential produced by chandelier activa-
cidin recordings could not be disregarded as an tion may, depending on its initiation point rela-
experimental artifact. tive to the ChC synapse, fail to backpropagate to
These data demonstrated that at least for layer the soma. This would prevent its detection both
2/3 cortical ChCs, and seemingly also for dentate by somatic patch recording and somatic action-
Cell-attached recordings granule cells, GABA at the AIS is depolarizing. potential derived fluorescence changes.
Recordings in which the recording
pipette is placed on the exterior of the
However, ChCs in CA1 produce a hyperpolariza- It is certainly not clear that the suprathreshold
cell membrane. Loose-seal cell-attached tion. Because the reversal potential of a GABAergic activation described by us and others – which is
recordings are commonly used for synapse is likely an important determinant of that the sole excitatory ChC action reported to date – is
recording currents due to action synapse’s function, an interesting dichotomy may a pathological response. However, until such acti-
potentials. Tight-seal cell-attached exist in the roles played by ChCs in different parts vations are directly observed by recording from a
recordings can be used to measure
synaptic potentials. In the absence of
of the brain, an intriguing possibility for a cell healthy pyramidal neuron, or until it is observed
injected current, cell-attached type previously hypothesized to be a fine example in the intact animal, the possibility that they are
recordings are completely non-invasive. of functional specialization. artifactual should be kept in mind.
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 6Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function
Disregarding the suprathreshold activations the driving force (EGABA − Vrest) is high enough,
induced by ChCs, we are left with the fact that in and EGABA is not too distant from VThr, GABA is
some parts of the brain, but perhaps not in others, proven to be excitatory in these neurons. The val-
ChCs are depolarizing. This subthreshold depo- ues reported for the three determining param-
larization is, in fact, likely to be the effect felt by eters in this study are, in fact, in line with those
the vast majority of recipient pyramidal neurons at the cortical ChC synapse, and an important
upon ChC activation. A highly pertinent question, requirement for GABAergic excitation appears
then, is whether this subthreshold depolarization to be the activation of voltage-gated sodium
is excitatory. A few factors merit some thought. channels (VGSCs), which allow the neuron to
The opening of any membrane channel decreases continue depolarizing despite being above EGABA
the neuronal input resistance, causing shunting (Figures 2A,B; Rheims et al., 2008; Valeeva et al.,
inhibition – a given current then produces a 2010). Since VGSCs at the AIS have a relatively
smaller voltage deflection. This shunting effect hyperpolarized activation threshold (Colbert and
is therefore by nature inhibitory, and antagonistic Pan, 2002; Astman et al., 2006; Hu et al., 2009)
to any depolarization (Figure 2C). Whether the due to the presence of NaV1.6 channels, in the
magnitude of the conductance shunt outweighs range of axonal EGABA, it certainly seems possible
the magnitude of the depolarization is therefore that ChCs can be excitatory in a manner similar
an important consideration, though it should to that seen in immature neurons.
be noted that once the conductance closes, any It should be noted that there is considerable
remaining depolarization is likely to be excitatory neuron to neuron variability in both EGABA and
(Figure 2C). VThr. Both of these parameters may be plastic,
Secondly, EGABA for the ChC synapse lies below changing according to the neuron’s activity his-
threshold. Although a ChC PSP may initially be tory (Henze and Buzsaki, 2001; Woodin et al.,
depolarizing, with the pyramidal neuron below 2003; Fiumelli et al., 2005), and small changes in
EGABA, continued depolarization of the pyra- these values are likely to be critical in determining
mid above EGABA, perhaps through additional whether GABA can be excitatory (Rheims et al.,
glutamatergic inputs, will result in the ChC PSP 2008). Thus, the precise interplay of the neuron’s
switching to hyperpolarizing and inhibitory, pro- membrane potential, EGABA and VThr, their modi-
vided the conductance is still open. Whether the fication by prior activity, and the activation of
net effect of ChC activation under these condi- axonal VGSCs seem to be the critical parameters
tions will help or hinder firing is therefore not that will determine whether ChCs can provide
straightforward. excitatory, as well as inhibitory, input.
Another point worth considering is that con- The discussion so far has focused on experi-
ductance effects aside, there still exists the theo- ments performed in vitro. However, neurons in
retical possibility for a depolarization-induced vivo are constantly bombarded with synaptic
inhibition due to inactivation of the Na+ chan- input, producing a depolarized and fluctuating
nels responsible for spike generation. However, we membrane potential that promotes the opening
believe this is unlikely to be a significant factor in and closure of a vast array of voltage depend-
the case of ChCs, given that depolarization also ent channels (Destexhe et al., 2003). That in vivo
greatly enhances Na+ channel open probability. membrane potentials are considerably more
Indeed, if this possibility is to be considered, one depolarized than in the quiescent in vitro slice
must also consider the possibility that similar may be particularly relevant for ChCs. Axonal
mechanisms can result in glutamatergic inputs EGABA in cortical layer 2/3 neurons is in the range
being inhibitory due to the depolarization they of −65 to −55 mV, values similar to mean mem-
produce – the situation is analogous. In addition, brane potentials recorded in awake animals
the AIS contains not only fast-inactivating Na+ (Brecht et al., 2004; Poulet and Petersen, 2008;
channels responsible for spike generation, but Gentet et al., 2010). Predicting the effect of ChCs
also slowly inactivating channels with a negatively in vivo therefore becomes quite a complicated
shifted activation threshold (Astman et al., 2006), exercise. If the in vivo membrane potential fluctu-
Shunting inhibition
which underlie the “persistent” sodium current, ates either side of EGABA, the ChC has the potential
A form of inhibition that results from INAP (Fleidervish et al., 2010). This persistent cur- to be excitatory as well as inhibitory. This may
the opening of a membrane rent may be important in aiding spike generation promote the homogenization of pyramidal neu-
conductance and the decrease in following a ChC input. ron firing rates, inhibiting strongly active neu-
excitability this causes. Typically used to A situation analogous to that in cortical ChCs, in rons but exciting those that are less active (Vida
describe the effect of a GABAergic
interneuron when EGABA of the synapse
which EGABA lies significantly above Vrest but below et al., 2006). In this scenario, ChCs may act as
is equal to the membrane potential of VThr, exists in immature neocortical (Rheims et al., activity sensors, passively adjusting their function
the neuron. 2008) and hippocampal pyramidal cells. Provided according to what is required by the surrounding
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 7Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function
network. The effect will be dictated, of course, by 2010; Varga et al., 2010). Whether there is spe-
the pyramidal neuron membrane potential, and cificity in which particular local and interlaminar
by the complex interplay of that neuron’s syn- neurons ChCs target is unknown, although there
aptic inputs. Whether the membrane potential is some evidence that they may preferentially
ever stays below EGABA for a sufficient period of contact pyramidal neurons with predominantly
time to allow depolarization, and whether the intracortical projections (De Carlos et al., 1985;
presumably small amount of depolarization (so Farinas and DeFelipe, 1991). The presynaptic
close to EGABA) provided by the ChC will out- partners of ChCs are less well documented. Laser
weigh the shunting effect, are critical questions. scanning photostimulation (LSPS) was recently
Alternatively, perhaps the ChC synapse in vivo applied to L2/3 ChCs in mouse primary somato-
should be considered predominantly shunting, sensory cortex, demonstrating excitatory input
and thus purely inhibitory. Indeed, during active predominantly from layers 2/3 and 5a, and inhibi-
states, the shunting effect often ascribed to basket tory input from L2/3 and L1 (Xu and Callaway,
cells, based on EGABA approximating resting poten- 2009). While this laminar input information is
tial in a slice, may be more appropriate for ChCs, certainly useful, a higher resolution technique
while BCs would instead provide hyperpolarizing such as two-photon photostimulation (Nikolenko
inhibition. In this way, ChCs and BCs could have et al., 2007) could be useful in determining more
quite distinct inhibitory, perisomatic functions. In precise input specificity. In addition, because these
CA1, where the ChC and BC synapses presumably mapping experiments are performed in slices, a
have more similar reversal potentials, any differ- great number of longer-range, inter-areal connec-
ences in function must depend more critically on tions are likely to be severed. We commonly find
the location of the synapse (AIS vs. soma/proxi- ChCs at the border between layer 1 and layer 2/3,
mal dendrites), or on differences in their pre and a site from which their dendrites have easy access
postsynaptic partners. to long-range “feedback” projections from higher
cortical areas. A promising method for determin-
Future Directions ing inter-areal connectivity is monosynaptic, ret-
While it has recently become more feasible to rograde tracing using a deletion-mutant rabies
record from ChCs, significant barriers to under- virus (Wickersham et al., 2007). These projec-
standing their function remain. Firstly, because of tions are unlikely to be maintained in vitro. In
their sparseness, recording from and manipulat- theory however, in vivo single-cell electroporation
ing more than one or two at a time is still difficult. or whole-cell patching of a ChC at the layer 1
Although some studies report robust network- border is possible and should allow the introduc-
level effects after manipulation of a single neuron tion of the virus, enabling both its local and long-
(Brecht et al., 2004; Houweling and Brecht, 2008; range presynaptic connections to be elucidated
Bonifazi et al., 2009), it would certainly be ben- (Marshel et al., 2010). It would be interesting, for
eficial to selectively control several ChCs at once. example, to determine the similarity in inter-areal
This sort of control has been demonstrated for input received by the apical tuft of L2/3 pyramidal
PV-expressing fast-spiking cells using neurons neurons and the layer 1 dendrites of ChCs located
transfected with channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2; in upper layer 2/3, whose major targets are those
Cardin et al., 2009; Sohal et al., 2009), a light- same pyramidal neurons.
activated proton pump capable of depolarizing While dissecting the synaptic and network
and activating neurons with high temporal reso- effects of chandelier neurons on cortical activ-
lution (Boyden et al., 2005). As of now, however, ity remains a major challenge, considering how
no unique genetic marker exists for ChCs, so that these effects may change during later postnatal
interrogating their function in this manner is not development adds another important twist to
yet possible. We expect this to happen in the near this story. Like other PV-expressing interneurons,
future, however, and their currently murky role ChCs in the mouse originate in the medial gan-
should become considerably clearer. glionic eminence from progenitors that express
Another important direction will be to the fate-determining transcription factor, Nkx2.1
determine the synaptic partners of ChCs. Their (Xu et al., 2008; Fazzari et al., 2010). Factors that
postsynaptic targets are quite well established, specify chandelier interneuron fate from other
predominantly being local pyramidal neurons, Nkx2.1+ lineages, including other PV-expressing
although some interlaminar connections also interneurons as well as those that express soma-
exist (Somogyi et al., 1982). There are increasing tostatin, are at this point unknown. During post-
numbers of reports demonstrating target specifi- natal development, the chandelier axon cartridges
city in neuronal connections (Yoshimura et al., begin to be identifiable in mouse cortex at about
2005; Brown and Hestrin, 2009; Anderson et al., postnatal day 14, based on analysis of GFP+ cells
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 8Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function
in Nkx2.1Cre MADM mice. In the cat visual cor- tant to determine whether the quantity as well as
tex, chandelier axon terminals undergo major the postsynaptic and network effects of chande-
refinements between the early postnatal period lier neuron activity change during the pubertal
and adulthood, although they appear to target age range of cortical development.
only the AIS (Somogyi et al., 1982). Clearly, many questions remain regarding the
Interestingly, this postnatal refinement may function of ChCs. Even the quite basic question
be quite protracted. In the macaque neocortex, of whether their synapses are depolarizing or
where chandelier cartridges are identifiable by hyperpolarizing is still somewhat open. While
immunohistochemistry for PV (DeFelipe et al., they may exert different effects in different parts
1989), the detectability of these cartridges is of the brain, this implies a different function for
highly dynamic (Anderson et al., 1995). A low what is otherwise considered a single neuronal
density is present by 3 months, but they increase subtype, an intriguing possibility. Secondly, if
greatly to reach a peak at about 15 months. the synapse can be depolarizing in vitro, that
However, their numbers diminish over the does not necessarily hold for conditions in vivo
pubertal age range, falling back to the level seen (at least in awake animals), and thus any func-
in 3-month-old brains by about 3 years of age. tions ascribed to ChCs recorded in the slice must
Since neither the density of GABA terminals be confirmed in the intact brain. Nor has it been
(Erickson and Lewis, 2002) nor the density of established experimentally that the depolariza-
GABAA receptors on the AIS (in mice; Katagiri tion cortical ChCs can provide is excitatory. The
et al., 2007) changes over this period, and since role that ChCs play in controlling or modulating
PV expression is known to be dependent on neuronal communication remains an intrigu-
extrinsic factors (Vogt Weisenhorn et al., 1998), ing mystery, hopefully to be solved in the near
the reduction of PV detectability in chandelier future.
axon terminals may reflect alterations of chande-
lier neuron activity over the pubertal age range. Acknowledgments
Given the major role of GABA maturation on We thank laboratory members for comments,
late-developing aspects of cortical plasticity Yeonsook Shin and Laura McGarry for help with
(Hensch, 2005), evidence that chandelier axon anatomical reconstructions and histological pro-
marker expression changes dramatically during cedures, and the National Eye Institute and the
postnatal development suggests that it is impor- NIMH for support.
References Brecht, M., Schneider, M., Sakmann, B., c handelier cells in the auditory cortex Farinas, I., and DeFelipe, J. (1991).
Anderson, C. T., Sheets, P. L., Kiritani, T., and Margrie, T. W. (2004). Whisker of the cat. Brain Res. 354, 293–300. Patterns of synaptic input on corti-
and Shepherd, G. M. (2010). Sublayer- movements evoked by stimulation DeFelipe, J., Hendry, S. H., and Jones, E. cocortical and corticothalamic cells
specific microcircuits of corticospinal of single pyramidal cells in rat motor G. (1989). Visualization of chandelier in the cat visual cortex. II. The axon
and corticostriatal neurons in motor cortex. Nature 427, 704–710. cell axons by parvalbumin immuno- initial segment. J. Comp. Neurol. 304,
cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 13, 739–744. Brown, S. P., and Hestrin, S. (2009). reactivity in monkey cerebral cor- 70–77.
Anderson, S. A., Classey, J. D., Conde, F., Intracortical circuits of pyramidal tex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 86, Fazzari, P., Paternain, A. V., Valiente,
Lund, J. S., and Lewis, D. A. (1995). neurons reflect their long-range axonal 2093–2097. M., Pla, R., Lujan, R., Lloyd, K.,
Synchronous development of targets. Nature 457, 1133–1136. DeFelipe, J., Hendry, S. H., Jones, E. G., Lerma, J., Marin, O., and Rico, B.
pyramidal neuron dendritic spines Cardin, J. A., Carlen, M., Meletis, K., and Schmechel, D. (1985). Variability (2010). Control of cortical GABA
and parvalbumin-immunoreactive Knoblich, U., Zhang, F., Deisseroth, in the terminations of GABAergic circuitry development by Nrg1
chandelier neuron axon terminals in K., Tsai, L. H., and Moore, C. I. (2009). chandelier cell axons on initial seg- and ErbB4 signalling. Nature 464,
layer III of monkey prefrontal cortex. Driving fast-spiking cells induces ments of pyramidal cell axons in the 1376–1380.
Neuroscience 67, 7–22. gamma rhythm and controls sensory monkey sensory-motor cortex. J. Fiumelli, H., Cancedda, L., and Poo, M.
Astman, N., Gutnick, M. J., and Fleidervish, responses. Nature 459, 663–667. Comp. Neurol. 231, 364–384. M. (2005). Modulation of GABAergic
I. A. (2006). Persistent sodium current Chattopadhyaya, B., Di Cristo, G., Destexhe, A., Rudolph, M., and Pare, D. transmission by activity via post-
in layer 5 neocortical neurons is pri- Higashiyama, H., Knott, G. W., (2003). The high-conductance state of synaptic Ca2+-dependent regula-
marily generated in the proximal axon. Kuhlman, S. J., Welker, E., and Huang, neocortical neurons in vivo. Nat. Rev. tion of KCC2 function. Neuron 48,
J. Neurosci. 26, 3465–3473. Z. J. (2004). Experience and activity- Neurosci. 4, 739–751. 773–786.
Bonifazi, P., Goldin, M., Picardo, M. A., dependent maturation of perisomatic Erickson, S. L., and Lewis, D. A. (2002). Fleidervish, I. A., Lasser-Ross, N., Gutnick,
Jorquera, I., Cattani, A., Bianconi, G., GABAergic innervation in primary Postnatal development of parvalbu- M. J., and Ross, W. N. (2010). Na+
Represa, A., Ben-Ari, Y., and Cossart, visual cortex during a postnatal critical min- and GABA transporter-immu- imaging reveals little difference in
R. (2009). GABAergic hub neurons period. J. Neurosci. 24, 9598–9611. noreactive axon terminals in monkey action potential-evoked Na+ influx
orchestrate synchrony in developing Colbert, C. M., and Pan, E. (2002). prefrontal cortex. J. Comp. Neurol. 448, between axon and soma. Nat. Neurosci.
hippocampal networks. Science 326, Ion channel properties underlying 186–202. 13, 852–860.
1419–1424. axonal action potential initiation in Fairen, A., and Valverde, F. (1980). Gentet, L. J., Avermann, M., Matyas,
Boyden, E. S., Zhang, F., Bamberg, E., pyramidal neurons. Nat. Neurosci. 5, A specialized type of neuron in F., Staiger, J. F., and Petersen, C. C.
Nagel, G., and Deisseroth, K. (2005). 533–538. the visual cortex of cat: a Golgi (2010). Membrane potential dynam-
Millisecond-timescale, genetically tar- De Carlos, J. A., Lopez-Mascaraque, L., and electron microscope study of ics of GABAergic neurons in the barrel
geted optical control of neural activity. and Valverde, F. (1985). Development, chandelier cells. J. Comp. Neurol. cortex of behaving mice. Neuron 65,
Nat. Neurosci. 8, 1263–1268. morphology and topography of 194, 761–779. 422–435.
Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 9Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function Glickfeld, L. L., Roberts, J. D., Somogyi, mouse visual cortex. Neuron 53, Biol. 6, e222. doi: 10.1371/journal. ments of pyramidal cells. Brain Res. P., and Scanziani, M. (2009). 805–812. pbio.0060222. 259, 137–142. Interneurons hyperpolarize pyrami- Kawaguchi, Y. (1995). Physiological sub- Murayama, M., Perez-Garci, E., Nevian, Soriano, E., and Frotscher, M. (1989). A dal cells along their entire soma- groups of nonpyramidal cells with T., Bock, T., Senn, W., and Larkum, GABAergic axo-axonic cell in the fas- todendritic axis. Nat. Neurosci. 12, specific morphological characteristics M. E. (2009). Dendritic encoding of cia dentata controls the main excita- 21–23. in layer II/III of rat frontal cortex. J. sensory stimuli controlled by deep tory hippocampal pathway. Brain Res. Gonzalez-Burgos, G., Krimer, L. S., Neurosci. 15, 2638–2655. cortical interneurons. Nature 457, 503, 170–174. Povysheva, N. V., Barrionuevo, G., Khirug, S., Yamada, J., Afzalov, R., Voipio, 1137–1141. Szabadics, J., Varga, C., Molnar, G., Olah, and Lewis, D. A. (2005). Functional J., Khiroug, L., and Kaila, K. (2008). Nikolenko, V., Poskanzer, K. E., and S., Barzo, P., and Tamas, G. (2006). properties of fast spiking interneurons GABAergic depolarization of the axon Yuste, R. (2007). Two-photon Excitatory effect of GABAergic axo- and their synaptic connections with initial segment in cortical principal photostimulation and imaging of axonic cells in cortical microcircuits. pyramidal cells in primate dorsolateral neurons is caused by the Na-K-2Cl neural circuits. Nat. Methods 4, Science 311, 233–235. prefrontal cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 93, cotransporter NKCC1. J. Neurosci. 943–950. Szentagothai, J. (1975). The “module-con- 942–953. 28, 4635–4639. Perkins, K. L. (2006). Cell-attached cept” in cerebral cortex architecture. Han, Z. S. (1994). Electrophysiological Klausberger, T., Magill, P. J., Marton, L. F., voltage-clamp and current-clamp Brain Res. 95, 475–496. and morphological differentiation Roberts, J. D., Cobden, P. M., Buzsaki, recording and stimulation techniques Tukker, J. J., Fuentealba, P., Hartwich, of chandelier and basket cells in the G., and Somogyi, P. (2003). Brain- in brain slices. J. Neurosci. Methods K., Somogyi, P., and Klausberger, rat hippocampal formation: a study state- and cell-type-specific firing of 154, 1–18. T. (2007). Cell type-specific tuning combining intracellular recording and hippocampal interneurons in vivo. Poulet, J. F., and Petersen, C. C. (2008). of hippocampal interneuron firing intracellular staining with biocytin. Nature 421, 844–848. Internal brain state regulates mem- during gamma oscillations in vivo. Neurosci. Res. 19, 101–110. Kyrozis, A., and Reichling, D. B. brane potential synchrony in barrel J. Neurosci. 27, 8184–8189. Hasbargen, T., Ahmed, M. M., Miranpuri, (1995). Perforated-patch recording cortex of behaving mice. Nature 454, Valeeva, G., Abdullin, A., Tyzio, R., G., Li, L., Kahle, K. T., Resnick, D., and with gramicidin avoids artifactual 881–885. Skorinkin, A., Nikolski, E., Ben-Ari, Sun, D. (2010). Role of NKCC1 and changes in intracellular chloride Ramón y Cajal, S. (1899). La Textura del Y., and Khazipov, R. (2010). Temporal KCC2 in the development of chronic concentration. J. Neurosci. Methods Sistema Nerviosa del Hombre y los coding at the immature depolar- neuropathic pain following spinal 57, 27–35. Vertebrados. Madrid: Moya (Primera izing GABAergic synapse. Front. cord injury. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1198, Lewis, D. A., Foote, S. L., and Cha, C. Edicion). Cell. Neurosci. 4:12. doi: 10.3389/ 168–172. I. (1989). Corticotropin-releasing Rheims, S., Minlebaev, M., Ivanov, A., fncel.2010.00017. Hensch, T. K. (2005). Critical period factor immunoreactivity in monkey Represa, A., Khazipov, R., Holmes, G. Varga, C., Lee, S. Y., and Soltesz, I. (2010). mechanisms in developing visual neocortex: an immunohistochemi- L., Ben-Ari, Y., and Zilberter, Y. (2008). Target-selective GABAergic control cortex. Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 69, cal analysis. J. Comp. Neurol. 290, Excitatory GABA in rodent develop- of entorhinal cortex output. Nat. 215–237. 599–613. ing neocortex in vitro. J. Neurophysiol. Neurosci. 13, 822–824. Henze, D. A., and Buzsaki, G. (2001). Lorente de Nó, R. (1922). La corteza cer- 100, 609–619. Vida, I., Bartos, M., and Jonas, P. (2006). Action potential threshold of hip- ebral del ratón. Trab. Lab. Invest. Bio. Sik, A., Tamamaki, N., and Freund, T. F. Shunting inhibition improves robust- pocampal pyramidal cells in vivo is (Madrid) 20, 41–78. (1993). Complete axon arborization ness of gamma oscillations in hip- increased by recent spiking activity. Markram, H., Toledo-Rodriguez, M., of a single CA3 pyramidal cell in the pocampal interneuron networks by Neuroscience 105, 121–130. Wang, Y., Gupta, A., Silberberg, G., rat hippocampus, and its relationship homogenizing firing rates. Neuron Houweling, A. R., and Brecht, M. (2008). and Wu, C. (2004). Interneurons of with postsynaptic parvalbumin-con- 49, 107–117. Behavioural report of single neuron the neocortical inhibitory system. Nat. taining interneurons. Eur. J. Neurosci. Vogt Weisenhorn, D. M., Celio, M. R., stimulation in somatosensory cortex. Rev. Neurosci. 5, 793–807. 5, 1719–1728. and Rickmann, M. (1998). The Nature 451, 65–68. Marr, D. (1970). A theory for cerebral Smetters, D., Majewska, A., and Yuste, R. onset of parvalbumin-expression in Hu, W., Tian, C., Li, T., Yang, M., Hou, neocortex. Proc. R. Soc. Lond., B, Biol. (1999). Detecting action potentials in interneurons of the rat parietal cortex H., and Shu, Y. (2009). Distinct con- Sci. 176, 161–234. neuronal populations with calcium depends upon extrinsic factor(s). Eur. tributions of Na(v)1.6 and Na(v)1.2 Marshel, J. H., Mori, T., Nielsen, K. J., and imaging. Methods 18, 215–221. J. Neurosci. 10, 1027–1036. in action potential initiation and Callaway, E. M. (2010). Targeting sin- Sohal, V. S., Zhang, F., Yizhar, O., and Wickersham, I. R., Lyon, D. C., Barnard, backpropagation. Nat. Neurosci. 12, gle neuronal networks for gene expres- Deisseroth, K. (2009). Parvalbumin R. J., Mori, T., Finke, S., Conzelmann, 996–1002. sion and cell labeling in vivo. Neuron neurons and gamma rhythms enhance K. K., Young, J. A., and Callaway, E. Inda, M. C., Defelipe, J., and Munoz, A. 67, 562–574. cortical circuit performance. Nature M. (2007). Monosynaptic restriction (2007). The distribution of chande- McDonald, A. J. (1982). Neurons of the 459, 698–702. of transsynaptic tracing from single, lier cell axon terminals that express the lateral and basolateral amygdaloid Somogyi, P. (1977). A specific “axo-axonal” genetically targeted neurons. Neuron GABA plasma membrane transporter nuclei: a Golgi study in the rat. J. interneuron in the visual cortex of the 53, 639–647. GAT-1 in the human neocortex. Cereb. Comp. Neurol. 212, 293–312. rat. Brain Res. 136, 345–350. Woodin, M. A., Ganguly, K., and Poo, M. Cortex 17, 2060–2071. Meyer, A. H., Katona, I., Blatow, M., Somogyi, P., Freund, T. F., and Cowey, M. (2003). Coincident pre- and post- Jones, E. G. (1975). Varieties and distri- Rozov, A., and Monyer, H. (2002). In A. (1982). The axo-axonic interneu- synaptic activity modifies GABAergic bution of non-pyramidal cells in the vivo labeling of parvalbumin-positive ron in the cerebral cortex of the rat, synapses by postsynaptic changes in somatic sensory cortex of the squir- interneurons and analysis of electri- cat and monkey. Neuroscience 7, Cl− transporter activity. Neuron 39, rel monkey. J. Comp. Neurol. 160, cal coupling in identified neurons. J. 2577–2607. 807–820. 205–267. Neurosci. 22, 7055–7064. Somogyi, P., Freund, T. F., Hodgson, A. J., Woodruff, A., Xu, Q., Anderson, S. A., and Kantrowitz, J. T., Francis, N. N., Salah, Miles, R., Toth, K., Gulyas, A. I., Hajos, N., Somogyi, J., Beroukas, D., and Chubb, Yuste, R. (2009). Depolarizing effect of A., and Perkins, K. L. (2005). and Freund, T. F. (1996). Differences I. W. (1985). Identified axo-axonic cells neocortical chandelier neurons. Front. Synaptic depolar izing GABA between somatic and dendritic inhibi- are immunoreactive for GABA in the Neural Circuits 3:15. doi: 10.3389/ Response in adults is excitatory and tion in the hippocampus. Neuron 16, hippocampus and visual cortex of the neuro.04.015.2009. proconvulsive when GABAB recep- 815–823. cat. Brain Res. 332, 143–149. Woodruff, A. R., Monyer, H., and Sah, P. tors are blocked. J. Neurophysiol. 93, Molnar, G., Olah, S., Komlosi, G., Fule, Somogyi, P., Nunzi, M. G., Gorio, A., (2006). GABAergic excitation in the 2656–2667. M., Szabadics, J., Varga, C., Barzo, and Smith, A. D. (1983). A new type basolateral amygdala. J. Neurosci. 26, Katagiri, H., Fagiolini, M., and Hensch, P., and Tamas, G. (2008). Complex of specific interneuron in the mon- 11881–11887. T. K. (2007). Optimization of somatic events initiated by individual spikes key hippocampus forming synapses Xu, Q., Tam, M., and Anderson, S. A. inhibition at critical period onset in in the human cerebral cortex. PLoS exclusively with the axon initial seg- (2008). Fate mapping Nkx2.1-lineage Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 10
Woodruff et al. Chandelier cell function cells in the mouse telencephalon. J. Yuste, R., and Katz, L. C. (1991). Control Conflict of Interest Statement: The chandelier cells. Front. Neurosci. 4:201. doi: Comp. Neurol. 506, 16–29. of postsynaptic Ca2+ influx in devel- authors declare that the research was 10.3389/fnins.2010.00201 Xu, X., and Callaway, E. M. (2009). oping neocortex by excitatory and conducted in the absence of any com- Copyright © 2010 Woodruff, Anderson Laminar specificity of functional input inhibitory neurotransmitters. Neuron mercial or financial relationships that and Yuste. This is an open-access arti- to distinct types of inhibitory cortical 6, 333–344. could be construed as a potential conflict cle subject to an exclusive license agree- neurons. J. Neurosci. 29, 70–85. Zhu, Y., Stornetta, R. L., and Zhu, J. J. of interest. ment between the authors and the Yoshimura, Y., Dantzker, J. L., and (2004). Chandelier cells control exces- Frontiers Research Foundation, which Callaway, E. M. (2005). Excitatory sive cortical excitation: characteristics of Received:20August2010;accepted:19November permits unrestricted use, distribution, cortical n eurons form fine-scale whisker-evoked synaptic responses of 2010; published online: 08 December 2010. and reproduction in any medium, pro- functional networks. Nature 433, layer 2/3 nonpyramidal and pyramidal Citation: Woodruff AR, Anderson SA and vided the original authors and source 868–873. neurons. J. Neurosci. 24, 5101–5108. Yuste R (2010) The enigmatic function of are credited. Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org December 2010 | Volume 4 | Article 201 | 11
You can also read
