HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Supplemental Figures and Tables All Versions of this Article: 100/2/932    most recent 01360.2007v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Krook-Magnuson, E. I. Articles by Huntsman, M. M. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Krook-Magnuson, E. I. Articles by Huntsman, M. M.

Tonically Active Inhibition Selectively Controls Feedforward Circuits in Mouse Barrel Cortex

Department of Pharmacology and Interdisciplinary Program in Neuroscience, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia

Submitted 17 December 2007; accepted in final form 23 May 2008

Tonic inhibition mediated by extrasynaptic -aminobutyric acid type A (GABA_A) receptors is a powerful conductance that controls cell excitability. Throughout the CNS, tonic inhibition is expressed at varying degrees across different cell types. Despite a rich history of cortical interneuron diversity, little is known about tonic inhibition in the different classes of cells in the cerebral cortex. We therefore examined the cell-type specificity and functional significance of tonic inhibition in layer 4 of the mouse somatosensory barrel cortex. In situ hybridization and immunocytochemistry showed moderate -subunit expression across the barrel structures. Whole cell patch-clamp recordings additionally indicated that significant levels of tonic inhibition can be found across cell types, with differences in the magnitude of inhibition between cell types. To activate tonic currents, we used 4,5,6,7-tetrahydroisoxazolo[5,4-c]pyridin-3-ol (THIP, a superagonist at -subunit–containing GABA_A receptors) at a concentration that did not affect synaptic decay kinetics. THIP produced greater shifts in baseline holding current in inhibitory cells (low-threshold spiking [LTS], 109 ± 17 pA; fast spiking [FS], 111 ± 15 pA) than in excitatory cells (39 ± 10 pA; P < 0.001). In addition to these differences across cell types, there was also variability within inhibitory cells. FS cells with faster action potentials had larger baseline shifts. Because FS cells are known mediators of feedforward inhibition, we tested whether THIP-induced tonic conductance selectively controls feedforward circuits. THIP application resulted in the abolishment of the inhibitory postsynaptic potential in thalamic-evoked disynaptic responses in a subset of excitatory neurons. These data suggest multiple feedforward circuits can be differentiated by the inhibitory control of the presynaptic inhibitory neuron.