Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2011 Aug 30;22(7):1520–1529. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhr223

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© The Authors 2011. Published by Oxford University Press.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PMC Copyright notice

Figure 3. — Altered hippocampal gamma oscillations in NRG1^{tg-type I} mice. (A). Cholinergic activation by carbachol (CCh) induces gamma frequency oscillations in hippocampal slices from wt and NRG1^{tg-type I} mice. One-second-long sample traces (low-pass filtered at 200 Hz) of the recorded field potential oscillations in the hippocampal CA3 pyramidal cell layer and corresponding PSDs in a wt mouse (A₁) and a NRG1^{tg-type I} mouse (A₂). PSDs, computed for the entire 60-s-long traces, confirm lower peak frequency in the NRG1^{tg-type I} mice. (B) Summary box plots of all recordings demonstrate that peak frequencies (shown in B₁) were consistently lower in NRG1^{tg-type I} slices (mean peak frequency in wt: 26.2 ± 1.0 Hz [mean + standard error of the mean] vs. NRG1^{tg-type I}: 22.0 ± 0.9 Hz; P = 0.006**). Whiskers indicate 90th and 10th percentiles of the data; outlying points are also plotted, dotted lines represent the mean. (B₂) Mean oscillatory power did not differ between groups (wt: 107.0 ± 44.8 μV²/Hz vs. NRG1^{tg-type I}: 141.4 ± 41.3 μV²/Hz; P = 0.44). (C) CA3 pyramidal cell firing during gamma oscillations. (C₁) Representative extracellular field and corresponding cell-attached recordings from slices taken from wt (top) and NRG1^{tg-type I} (bottom) mice. (C₂) Histogram comparing the mean firing rate (Hertz) of individual pyramidal cells in wt (black) and NRG1^{tg-type I} (gray) mice, with scatter plots corresponding to their firing rates. Statistical analysis revealed no difference between the groups (wt: 2.70 ± 0.56, NRG1^{tg-type I}: 3.66 ± 0.81; P = 0.36). (C₃) Histogram comparing the strength of pyramidal cell firing coupling to the field oscillation in wt (black) and NRG1^{tg-type I} (gray) mice, plus scatter plots representing the coupling values of all individual cells recorded. The average vector length (see Supplementary Materials) did not differ between genotypes (wt: 0.38 ± 0.03; NRG1^{tg-type I} mice: 0.43 ± 0.05; P = 0.38). Error bars in C₂ and C₃ are standard error of the mean. (C₄) Distributions of the mean angles (degrees) at which cells fired relative to the field potential oscillation (wt: 12 cells from 5 mice; NRG1^{tg-type I}: 12 cells from 7 mice). A representative cycle-averaged field oscillation is shown to illustrate phase definition. Firing of pyramidal cells is similarly phase locked to ascending phase of a field gamma cycle in both genotypes with no difference between groups (wt [black]: −111.4° ± 10.0°, NRG1^{tg-type I} [gray]: −93.3° ± 9.2°; P = 0.106).