Talk:Synaptic gating

This page is being worked on for a neuroscience Wikipedia improvement project for the class BI481 at Boston College. The group members for this project are User:dbaush, User:stempera and User:rampreddy. Any input on our additions or suggestions for the topic would be much appreciated. —Preceding undated comment added 02:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC).

Peer Review

• Overall I think this article is well written. After reading the article I came away with a relatively large amount of information. I did however find some things that I thought could be changed. The first thing that came to mind was when you use quotation marks around words such as "gatekeeper". I am not sure if this is the scientific term actually used in the scientific community. I think you should use an appropriate term that has scientific meaning. If these quoted words are actually used in the scientific community, then disregard that comment. The next thing I noticed that could be expanded was when you talk about inhibition. I noticed it was a major subtopic, but when I got to that area, it had little information. If you could expand in this area, I think it will increase the value of the article. Finally, I think the current research section needs to be expanded. Right now there is only one sentence in this subtopic. Maybe you could go into the experiments being done. Overall the article is good, just need to look into those things in my opinion. Hope this helps. Finnry (talk) 20:43, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions! You were right about the quotation marks--terms such as gatekeeper, up state and down state are the actual scientific terms, so we eliminated the quotations. In addition, we have expanded the current research section to include an intriguing application of gating to entire networks of neurons. We are still working on the inhibition section, but that is sure to be expanded as well. Stempera (talk) 02:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• Nice work so far, just a few comments. I would link synapse somewhere in your first paragraph of the topic just in case readers don't have much background in this subject. Also, maybe think about linking more words in the article to other Wikipedia articles (for example in the intro hyperpolarized, depolarized, and threshold potential). I think a good way to enhance the article further would be to add an image or two. I'm not sure how easy it is to find these, but check out commons because any image here can just be added to the article pretty easily. An idea of an image that can probably be found here would be an action potential image/graph which may be helpful for the reader to understand the article better. Under the "Synaptic gating and disease" section where you talk about schizophrenia, I would link that subhead to the main article of schizophrenia by adding
  Main article: schizophrenia
  immediately under the subheading. Also I noticed that a lot of places are missing citations--make sure that they are all linked up to the references at the end of your article. Good job on being concise throughout the article, it was pretty easy to understand and I thought everything seemed relevant that you included. Tbaril52 (talk) 02:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the input! We definitely needed to add a number of links, including synapse, so we have made those changes. We have also added a couple of images, so hopefully the concept is more clear. One of the images we created, and the other is an existing image of an electrical current. Also, good suggestion on the "main page" additions for schizophrenia. We also added it for ADHD. We didn't realize that we had to cite the same article multiple times, so we have added the additional citations. Thanks again! Stempera (talk) 02:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• Overall this article looked great so far. I thought you included some interesting information and did a good job of picking out the important facts to include. One of the main things that I noticed was the lack of citations in the introduction. It seems like you may be waiting on some sources based on the rest of the article but just make sure to cite some of the specific information, particularly in the first paragraph. Another thing I would suggest would be to try and include something in the introduction mentioning the larger scale consequences of imposing a gate on a cell. You discuss the more immediate effects it has on the cells in the synapse but it would be interesting to know if or how that affects downstream cells, the surrounding environment, the circuit as a whole, etc. I'd also be interested to know if this phenomenon is restricted to any specific areas of the nervous system. I'm not sure how much research is available or if you would be able to find that information but those are just some suggestions to give the article a larger context. However, I thought you included some great details on the mechanisms and functions as well as the related diseases.MKMurphy (talk) 05:03, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions! We have added a new section after the introduction of the origin of the synaptic gating model. It was based off of the idea of an electrical circuit and transmission of current. I think it will be a good reference point for people, especially for those who may not be as familiar with the topic. We have included in the "future research" section a new piece of research about bistable networks, as a larger application of bistable neurons and synaptic gating. Hopefully this gives some insight on some of the larger effects of synaptic gating--especially because it seems to be an area of current research. We will look into the specific areas where synaptic gating is most prevalent, and try to incorporate that in more detail in the introduction and perhaps other applicable subsections. Stempera (talk) 02:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• First of all, great job on this – I liked the structure and headings that you used to organize the information you had, and for the most part the information was easy to understand, especially for a topic that seems still largely under investigation. Something I was wondering about as I was reading was where the phrase “synaptic gating” was first coined. Another suggestion I might have is to include (depending on how much research actually exists) why the brain has a limited ability to process information (under “Role in spatial attention” subheading). It seems like you have three solid sources for that section; maybe expand upon those? What does each individual source say, or do they all have relatively the same information and in the same context? Furthermore, I liked how you included links to other Wikipedia pages but some of these linked pages were not as helpful as I hoped. For example, when I visited the AND gate page, I found it hard to understand, rather than informative and detailed. In this case, perhaps you could include a descriptive phrase summarizing whatever is most important in the Wiki you are linking to, so someone doesn’t necessarily have to look at the link. Moreover, (and this is a minor detail but) in the section about schizophrenia, could you define what PFC stands for? And finally, I agree with Finnry above. I understand that the research must be very limited for this topic but if the current research is not voluminous, maybe consider including where the research is being directed around synaptic gating – towards the diseases? Or the mechanism? I’m not sure you run the risk of confusing the reader by including even more information from the studies that are in progress. Good luck and thanks for sharing some fascinating aspects of this process! KelleyAmbrose (talk) 06:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Kelley! We have looked into where the name "synaptic gating" came from--it comes from the comparison of a gated synapse to a electrical circuit, in which a transistor serves as a "gate". We added a section on this model of a gated synapse, so hopefully it will make the whole concept easier to understand. Currently, we are looking to expand the inhibitory and permissive gating sections, so we will definitely try to draw from some of the sources we already have so that the concepts are as clear as possible. We found some current research about synaptic gating on a larger scale in networks of neurons, so we included that in the current research section. It has been rather difficult to find extensive research and sources for synaptic gating, but we will make an effort to use the ones we have found to make a more coherent article. Stempera (talk) 02:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• Good job explaining things step by step to make it easier to understand. In the beginning you do a good job linking words to other articles and suggesting articles to be viewed, but you do less of this as the article goes on. If pages exist for these terms, I would suggest linking "bistable neurons", "inhibitory modulation", "nucleus accumbens" and some of the other physiological terms. There were a few sentences I found unnecessarily wordy like "it becomes necessary that the brain have the ability..." in the section labeled "Role in spatial attention". I thought any time you had to explain the fluctuating down and up states of bistable neurons you presented it very clearly and logically so it was easy to follow. I would try to expand the research section and rather than just saying there is no evidence, say what kinds of research could be done to find evidence. Overall, good job! mccartqd (talk) 06:44, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

We've gone through and linked up to as many of the physiological terms as possible. Unfortunately, due to the lack of research done on this topic some key terms - like bistable neurons - have no Wikipedia pages. We've also gone through and done editing so unnecessary and unclear sentences have been fixed. Our research section has also been substantially updated, but again, research in this area is very much lacking. Thanks for the input! Dbaush (talk) 16:28, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• While this article was well-written and well organized overall, it could use some expansion. There are several sentences that end with [citation needed], and should be properly documented so that readers can find the initial information source if desired. The Schizophrenia section ties in nicely to the article topic. Are there other disorders that synaptic gating pertains to that you could also include? I would suggest lengthening the final research subsection, as the one sentence that is currently there is a bit vague and doesn't conclude the article well, and would recommend adding in more in-text links to other wikipedia pages where possible. It also may be useful to include an image where possible to further enhance the article.Keaneybr (talk) 00:46, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

All the sections where citations were needed have been updated and the final research section has been lengthened. We've also added many more in-text links to other pages and added a couple of images to help elaborate on certain topics. Thanks for the suggestions! Dbaush (talk) 16:28, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• I think this is a good start and a good framework to work off of. Overall the article is very well written and informative. I like the structure of the article and the subsections it is divided into. There are many areas where citations are needed and will serve to improve and validate the facts given. I also think in some areas, such as both inhibition subsections and current research, there could be more depth and description. I also agree that diagrams would be an easy way to further strengthen your article and provide readers with a mechanism for better understanding. I like the disease section and find it very interesting. Perhaps you add to this section and link it to other pages. Overall I think this is a good start and with some further additions can be a very effective article. Manninpk (talk) 02:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Research in this field is highly limited so we've only been able to add so much to certain subsections. However, we've added citations to the areas that needed them and elaborated on the research section and the other subsections. The mechanisms by which synaptic gating occurs are not known, but we have added a couple of images to help give a better explanation of what it is and how it occurs. What we have in the disease section is all there is on the topic, but we have added more links to other pages throughout our article. Thanks for the help! Dbaush (talk) 16:28, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• In general the article is organized nicely and flows cohesively. It would be nice if there was more detail on how the presence of NMDA and AMPA receptors give bistable neurons the ability to oscillate between a hyperpolarized and polarized potential without firing an action potential. I was also wondering if there was any research on how gating facilitates the ability of the brain to filter out unnecessary information or on its role in the process of attention. Some citations are needed throughout the article. A graph or visual representation of the changes in membrane potential in the up/down state of neurons may be helpful. The section on inhibition could go into more depth.canesir (talk) 22:10, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

The mechanisms through which the glutamate receptors give bistable neurons the ability to oscillate is not fully understood. We've elaborated as much as we can given the amount of research done on the topic. What we have on spatial attentions is all the research we were able to find. We've added citations and images and elaborated on the sections that were lacking in detail. Thanks for all of your help! Dbaush (talk) 16:28, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• In general this is a fairly well written article filled with a lot of scientific information. I might want to revise the introduction because they are two really dense paragraphs, maybe give more explanations or expand on ideas so that it might be easier to understand by a wikipedia reader who doesn't have a strong background in science. the citations need revising since many just say "citation needed", it is really important to reference sources to legitimize your article. I might also suggest expanding the article overall since you do have 10 paragraphs but a few only have one or two sentences, so I wouldn't really consider these paragraphs. The current and future research would be a great place to start adding to the page since you say very little. I am sure there is someone that is doing research on synaptic gating, which you can find by doing a quick google scholar or pubmed search. The inhibition section is another place where it would easy to expand on, there has been some information that has been covered in class that you could probably apply to this article and expand upon ideas already stated. Lastly I would suggest linking the article to other wikipedia pages to help direct the reader to more information on synaptic gating and always do a quick run-through the article to check for spelling/ grammar or organizational mistakes.Lauren.ching (talk) 03:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your wonderful suggestions. We have tried to clarify the introduction and leave the groggy details for later in the stub. We have added a plethora of citations and fixed many of the "holes" you pointed out. We had 10 paragraphs, but have severely expanded our article to not only having more information in each paragraph but have also added one or two more sections. We have added many more links and greatly expanded the inhibition and current/future research sections to incorporate a wider amount of material.Rampreddy (talk) 22:09, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

• I really liked the diseases section, theories of how synaptic gating can result in ADHD and schizophrenia. I can imagine that sources for such information are hard to find but as the site suggests, more citations and details are encouraged. You have to keep in mind that the general public may read this article as well. I think you can do a better job explaining terms and mechanisms. At least, you can create links for the terms so that people can have direct access when they need to refer to them. I am interested in biochemistry and would like to see specific examples regarding modulations. What is the gating signal and what molecule in the neuron allows it to play the gatekeeper role? Again, I can imagine that information is hard to find but I'm sure there are research on the topic (like the Gate theory of pain) that cover potential molecules that play important role. Maybe you can add a history section that briefly describe past research and what conclusions, if any, each research was able to reach. Also, I don't quite understand the biological AND gate and would like to see an explanation of it. Thanks,Young B. (talk) 6:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all your suggestions. We have expanded the diseases section and added more on ADHD and schizophrenia. In addition, we have created links to more words. The biochemistry of neuromodulation, and particularly synaptic gating, is quite complicated and there is a lack of conclusive literature on the material, which is why it has been left out. The "history" section is essentially how circuits use gating very similarly to the brain, and is a major reason why this theory has been proposed as a neural mechanism. We have tried to expand on the biological AND gate with the use of an electronic circuit, so it is easier for the reader to understand. Lastly, there isn't a particular molecule that plays a role but rather different neurons can gate selective inputs. For instance, the ADHD and schizophrenia section convey that the hippocampal neurons act to gate the nucleus accumbens neurons for projections from the PFC. Here, the nucleus accumbens neurons act as the gate because they are bistable and the hippocampus acts to regulate the gate.Rampreddy (talk) 22:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

• I would agree with some of the above comments that you could add more Wiki links throughout the article, especially at the beginning when you're introducing the topic, so that readers unfamiliar with the broader neural subject can find more information easily. Also, it would be good if you could into more detail in the disease section. You explain the comorbidity with anxiety, which is good, but then you fail to explain the several theories of how the impairment affects those with ADHD. I would like to hear more about this because I think it would make for a very interesting part of your article. Another recommendation is that you include acronyms in parentheses after you write out the full term, so that when you use the acronym later in the text the reader will have already seen it before and know exactly what it stands for. The one I noticed most was PFC, which I know means prefrontal cortex, but if you could just include (PFC) next to the first time you write out prefrontal cortex, so that when you mention it later in the disease section, the reader will make that link. Again it would benefit readers who are not as familiar with neural terms. Otherwise I think the article was well-written. Keep it up! Gdusing12315 (talk) 4:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions! We have added more Wiki links throughout the article and have tried to tie in the introduction more with the rest. We detail that ADHD is effected by the DA input from the PFC and hippocampus on the nucleus accumbens. This is similar to schizophrenia and we have expanded an explanation on this. In addition, an explanation on ADHD has been given, which hopefully allows the reader to understand how it is connected to synaptic gating and schizophrenia. We have included prefrontal cortex (PFC) in the beginning of the schizophrenia paragraph to make it clearer to the reader.Rampreddy (talk) 22:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

• Overall, it looks like a very well organized article and well formatted. What struck out to me as a possible area for improvement is the lack of pictures or diagrams and the introductory paragraph. A visual aid perhaps detailing the mechanisms of permissive gating would be beneficial. You mentioned that there were a variety of mechanisms but only explained one, a good idea might be to elaborate on that area. The introductory paragraph is good, but the two paragraphs didn't see to flow - possible make a more fluid transition between the two. I noticed that you mentioned several times but a recent study did this or that but in the current research or future research there wasn't any information, I would suggest explaining the research that you did find and where that research originated...maybe which universities are pursuing this topic. The disease portion is really good but I would suggest linking some of the neuroscience vocabulary to a wiki page if you can or explaining what words mean. For example, there is no mention of what dopamine or the amygdala are.[[User:Boothra] (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:20, 8 April 2011 (UTC).

Thanks for your suggestions. We have added two visual figures, one a very simple schematic of how synaptic gating should work in the brain, and the other is a picture of an electric circuit that illustrates an example of a transistor and thus the gating of electric circuits. We have also tried to make a better introduction that more completely explains the concepts and is more fluid. We found it difficult to pinpoint specific universities undergoing current research with this but the research on bistable networks in the future research section was done at the University of Wisconsin. Lastly, we have linked more neuroscience vocabulary to other wiki pages throughout the article.Rampreddy (talk) 00:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Non-peer review

One thing I think is missing from this article is a brief discussion of gating in electronics, which is really the motivation for the idea of synaptic gating. All modern electronic systems depend on gating, and the invention of circuit elements that could do gating was the key to the advance of electronics. The earliest gating elements were relays, which were very slow because they depended on mechanical switching. The invention of vacuum tubes was a huge advance, but they were bulky and consumed a lot of power. The invention of transistors brought in a gating element that was fast, consumed little power, and could be miniaturized. It would help this article, I think, to explain this background, and show a schematic picture of a transistor with its three leads -- input, output, and gate.

In electronics, gating is used in two basic ways. First, it allows logic: the gate can be used to switch a circuit between open and closed states. Second, it allows amplification: the gate can be used to throttle the level of current flowing from input to output. When people speak of synaptic gating, they are usually trying to understand the function of a neural circuit in terms of either logical switching or amplification.

I will add a few other points presently. Looie496 (talk) 17:37, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions! Although we are not entirely familiar with the details of electronic circuits, we have done our best to outline the basics of this concept under the "Gated synapse model" heading. We appreciate any further additions or suggestions you have for expanding this topic. In particular, we are trying to locate an appropriate figure that will adequately describe the transistor.Stempera (talk) 02:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

End of Boston College BI481 Project

Hi guys, nice job with the article, much better than before you started. A few issues:

• From the intro: "Bistable neurons have the ability to oscillate between a hyperpolarized (down state) and a polarized (up state) resting membrane potential without firing an action potential". This should probably state depolarized instead of just polarized.
• There are a few anatomical terms such as nucleus accumbens and hippocampus that should be hyperlinked to their respective WP articles, since you're discussing specific gating that takes place in those structures.

NeuroJoe (talk) 01:43, 8 May 2011 (UTC)