Elsevier

Brain Research

Volume 880, Issues 1–2, 13 October 2000, Pages 51-64
Brain Research

Research report
Differential modulation of auditory thalamocortical and intracortical synaptic transmission by cholinergic agonist

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-8993(00)02766-9Get rights and content

Abstract

To investigate synaptic mechanisms underlying information processing in auditory cortex, we examined cholinergic modulation of synaptic transmission in a novel slice preparation containing thalamocortical and intracortical inputs to mouse auditory cortex. Extracellular and intracellular recordings were made in cortical layer IV while alternately stimulating thalamocortical afferents (via medial geniculate or downstream subcortical stimulation) and intracortical afferents. Either subcortical or intracortical stimulation elicited a fast, 6-cyano-7-nitroquinoxaline-2,3-dione (CNQX)-sensitive, monosynaptic EPSP followed by long-duration, polysynaptic activity. The cholinergic agonist carbachol suppressed each of the synaptic potentials to different degrees. At low concentrations (5 μM) carbachol strongly reduced (>60%) the polysynaptic slow potentials for both pathways but did not affect the monosynaptic fast potentials. At higher doses (10–50 μM), carbachol also reduced the fast potentials, but reduced the intracortically-elicited fast potential significantly more than the thalamocortically-elicited fast potential, which at times was actually enhanced. Atropine (0.5 μM) blocked the effects of carbachol, indicating muscarinic receptor involvement. We conclude that muscarinic modulation can strongly suppress intracortical synaptic activity while exerting less suppression, or actually enhancing, thalamocortical inputs. Such differential actions imply that auditory information processing may favor sensory information relayed through the thalamus over ongoing cortical activity during periods of increased acetylcholine (ACh) release.

Introduction

Cells of the auditory cortex (AC) receive sensory input from thalamic relay cells of the medial geniculate nucleus (MG; extrinsic inputs), and from other cells within the cortex (intrinsic inputs) which themselves can receive either direct or indirect MG input ( [8], [45], [46], [55], [56], [57], [60], [72], [75] and reviewed in [73], [74]). These two sources of input combine to produce sensory evoked responses observed in AC.

The AC also receives non-sensory inputs that modulate evoked responses (see reviews by [34], [35]). Prominent among these is the projection from the cholinergic basal forebrain, the major source of ACh to the AC (reviewed by [40], [62]). The cholinergic system exerts powerful effects on sensory cortex, influencing cellular excitability, cortical state, and receptive field plasticity [5], [11], [14], [22], [29], [36], [38], [41], [44], [50]. In particular, application of cholinergic agonists or stimulation of the basal forebrain can profoundly modulate cortical EPSPs in sensory cortex both in vivo and in vitro [3], [6], [11], [19], [31], [42], [51].

While the influence of ACh on sensory cortical responses is undisputed, little is known regarding the degree to which it regulates transmission coming from extrinsic (thalamocortical) vs. intrinsic (intracortical) sources. This may be surprising considering the importance of such knowledge for understanding cholinergic regulation of sensation and perception. However, the acquisition of relevant data has been hampered by several factors, including the difficulty in conducting appropriate experiments in vivo and the limited availability of in vitro preparations with intact thalamocortical connections [1], [49]. In one in vitro study which directly tests this issue, Gil et al. [19] utilized a somatosensory thalamocortical slice to demonstrate that activation of muscarinic ACh receptors suppressed intracortical and thalamocortical EPSPs similarly. In contrast to these findings, muscarinic actions in hippocampus and piriform cortex result in a strong suppressive effect on intracortical synapses with little effect on responses to extrinsic inputs [24], [26]. An important question that emerges from these studies is whether the contrasting findings reflect functional distinctions between neocortex [19] vs. archicortex/paleocortex [24], [26], or other, possibly methodological, differences. Indirect evidence addressing this issue comes from the recent work of Kimura et al. [30]. They found that ACh suppressed responses to white matter stimulation in upper and lower layers of visual cortex more than in the thalamo-recipient middle layers. The authors propose that muscarinic suppression of intracortical synapses is stronger than that of thalamocortical synapses. This would suggest that the distinction between neocortex and archicortex/paleocortex (hypothesized above) may not be valid.

To address this issue, we have utilized a slice preparation of the AC that, like the somatosensory thalamocortical slice used by Gil et al. [19], preserves both extrinsic inputs from the thalamus and intrinsic, long-range intracortical connections [43]. With this slice, we directly compare cholinergic modulation of thalamocortical and intracortical synaptic transmission. Portions of this work have appeared in abstract form [28].

Section snippets

Preparation of slices

All procedures followed the University of California, Irvine, animal use regulation. Slices were taken from 15 to 43-day-old FVB mice and maintained in vitro (described by Metherate and Cruikshank [43]). Following decapitation under halothane anesthesia, brains were rapidly removed (<60 s) and placed in 0–4°C artificial cerebrospinal fluid (ACSF) containing (in mM): NaCl 125, KCl 2.5, KH2PO4 1.25, NaHCO3 25, MgSO4 1.2, CaCl2 2, dextrose 10; bubbled with 95% O2/5% CO2. Auditory thalamocortical

Results

The results are divided into two sets of experiments. The initial experiments were designed to separately activate extrinsic (subcortical) and intrinsic (intracortical) inputs leading to AC. We placed one stimulating electrode subcortically, within the downstream part of the auditory thalamocortical pathway, and a second stimulating electrode within the middle layers of the cortex lateral to the recording electrode (Fig. 1A). Recordings were made in layer IV of AC at the site of the maximal

Discussion

We have examined cholinergic modulation of responses evoked by stimulation of extrinsic (thalamocortical) and intrinsic (intracortical) inputs to auditory cortex. For both pathways, muscarinic modulation suppressed long-duration polysynaptic responses more strongly than it suppressed monosynaptic potentials. Further, intrinsic monosynaptic responses were suppressed significantly more than were extrinsic monosynaptic responses. These differential findings have important implications for

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Dr. V. B. Aramakis for helpful discussions and comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by the NSF (IBN 9510904), NIDCD (DC02967), University of California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program (8RT-0059) and an NIMH training grant (MH14599).

References (77)

  • C.M Muller et al.

    Acetylcholine-induced inhibition in the cat visual cortex is mediated by a GABAergic mechanism

    Brain Res.

    (1989)
  • T Murakoshi

    Cholinergic modulation of synaptic transmission in the rat visual cortex in vitro

    Vision Res.

    (1995)
  • E.M Rouiller et al.

    Morphology of corticothalamic terminals arising from the auditory cortex of the rat: a Phaseolus vulgaris-leucoagglutinin (PHA-L) tracing study

    Hear Res.

    (1991)
  • D.K Ryugo et al.

    Differential telencephalic projections of the medial and ventral divisions of the medial geniculate body of the rat

    Brain Res.

    (1974)
  • M Sahin et al.

    Location of nicotinic and muscarinic cholinergic and mu-opiate receptors in rat cerebral neocortex: evidence from thalamic and cortical lesions

    Brain Res.

    (1992)
  • R Schliebs et al.

    Immunolesion by 192IgG-saporin of rat basal forebrain cholinergic system: a useful tool to produce cortical cholinergic dysfunction

    Prog. Brain Res.

    (1996)
  • M Segal

    Multiple action of acetylcholine at a muscarinic receptor studied in the rat hippocampal slice

    Brain Res.

    (1982)
  • A.M Sillito

    The cholinergic neuromodulatory system: an evaluation of its functional roles

    Prog. Brain Res.

    (1993)
  • A.M Sillito et al.

    Cholinergic modulation of the functional organization of the cat visual cortex

    Brain Res.

    (1983)
  • C Vidal et al.

    Nicotinic and muscarinic modulations of excitatory synaptic transmission in the rat prefrontal cortex in vitro

    Neuroscience

    (1993)
  • Z.W Zhang et al.

    Neuronal acetylcholine receptors that bind alpha-bungarotoxin with high affinity function as ligand-gated ion channels

    Neuron

    (1994)
  • V.B Aramakis et al.

    Muscarinic reduction of GABAergic synaptic potentials results in disinhibition of the AMPA/kainate-mediated EPSP in auditory cortex

    Brain Res.

    (1997)
  • V.B Aramakis et al.

    Nicotine selectively enhances NMDA receptor-mediated synaptic transmission during postnatal development in sensory neocortex

    J. Neurosci.

    (1998)
  • J.M Auerbach et al.

    Muscarinic receptors mediating depression and long-term potentiation in rat hippocampus

    J. Physiol.

    (1996)
  • J.S Bakin et al.

    Induction of a physiological memory in the cerebral cortex by stimulation of the nucleus basalis

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA

    (1996)
  • D.A Brown et al.

    Muscarinic suppression of a novel voltage-sensitive K+ current in a vertebrate neurone

    Nature

    (1980)
  • V Caviness et al.

    Tangential organization of thalamic projections to the neocortex in the mouse

    J. Comp. Neurol.

    (1980)
  • A.E Cole et al.

    Acetylcholine mediates a slow synaptic potential in hippocampal pyramidal cells

    Science

    (1983)
  • C.L Cox et al.

    Modulation of cellular excitability in neocortex: muscarinic receptor and second messenger-mediated actions of acetylcholine

    Synapse

    (1994)
  • S.J. Cruikshank, H.J. Rose, R. Metherate, In vitro physiological comparison of MGV inputs to layer 3/4 of auditory...
  • R Curro Dossi et al.

    Short-lasting nicotinic and long-lasting muscarinic depolarizing responses of thalamocortical neurons to stimulation of mesopontine cholinergic nuclei

    J. Neurophysiol.

    (1991)
  • J.P Donaghue et al.

    Cholinergic modulation of sensory responses in rat primary somatic sensory cortex

    Brain Res.

    (1987)
  • J.M Edeline et al.

    Transient and prolonged facilitation of tone-evoked responses induced by basal forebrain stimulations in the rat auditory cortex

    Exp. Brain Res.

    (1994)
  • D Ferster et al.

    An intracellular analysis of geniculo-cortical connectivity in area 17 of the cat

    J. Physiol. (Lond.)

    (1983)
  • D Ferster et al.

    Synaptic excitation of neurones in area 17 of the cat by intracortical axon collaterals of cortico-geniculate cells

    J. Physiol. (Lond.)

    (1985)
  • Z Gil et al.

    Properties of convergent thalamocortical and intracortical synaptic potentials in single neurons of neocortex

    J. Neurosci.

    (1996)
  • Y Gioanni et al.

    Nicotinic receptors in the rat prefrontal cortex: increase in glutamate release and facilitation of mediodorsal thalamo-cortical transmission

    Eur. J. Neurosci.

    (1999)
  • R Gray et al.

    Hippocampal synaptic transmission enhanced by low concentrations of nicotine

    Nature

    (1996)
  • Cited by (135)

    • Cholinergic modulation of sensory perception and plasticity

      2023, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
    • Cholinergic and Adenosinergic Modulation of Synaptic Release

      2021, Neuroscience
      Citation Excerpt :

      ACh may act via mAChRs or nAChRs (or both) to modulate short-term synaptic plasticity by means of presynaptic regulation of transmitter release. The cholinergic modulation of intracortical synaptic transmission was found in different cortical layers, resulting in an increase of the ‘signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)’ in cortical networks thereby increasing the sensitivity of cortical neurons to external stimuli (Hsieh et al., 2000; Oldford and Castro-Alamancos, 2003). Both subtypes of Gi protein-coupled mAChRs, M2 and M4-type receptors, are expressed at presynaptic terminals of both rodent and human neocortical neurons (Levey et al., 1991; for reviews see Thiele, 2013; Obermayer et al., 2017).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    These authors contributed equally to the work.

    View full text