Homeostasis or synaptic plasticity? (original) (raw)

Neurobiology

Nature volume 391, pages 845–846 (1998)Cite this article

Almost 50 years ago, Hebb1 proposed that during development, learning and perception, correlated activity induces long-lasting strengthening in synaptic transmission. Remarkably, however, neurobiologists inspired by Hebb's principle have sought only one side of the regulatory process — that is, synapse-specific changes in synaptic strengths. They have rarely thought about the compensatory mechanisms that regulate the total synaptic strength of a neuron (reviewed in ref. 2). But on page 892 of this issue, Turrigiano et al.3 describe stabilizing mechanisms that may represent a more general form of activity-dependent regulation of synaptic transmission. The changes in postsynaptic sensitivity that they have found might be seen as a demonstration of basic homeostasis, designed to return the integrative function of the cell to within a reference working range.

Five homeostatic processes related to synaptic integration are generally recognized. The simplest form regulates the efficacy of transmission around a mean synaptic gain or between two boundary values. When evaluated on a longer timescale, the fast, input-dependent regulation of synaptic transmission (recently described in cortical networks4,5) results in an averaged synaptic efficacy that is roughly constant in the face of rapid changes in the probability of transmitter release6. Furthermore, the probability of inducing potentiation, depression or depotentiation depends on the previous stimulation history of the network (‘metaplasticity’ in ref. 7) and on the initial state of the synapse.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

$199.00 per year

only $3.90 per issue

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

References

  1. Hebb, D. O. The Organization of Behavior: a Neurophysiological Theory (Wiley, New York, 1949).
  2. Frégnac, Y. in Handbook of Brain Theory and Neural Networks (ed. Arbib, M.) 459-464 (MIT Press, 1995).
  3. Turrigiano, G. G., Leslie, K. R., Desai, N. S., Rutherford, L. C. & Nelson, S. B. Nature 391, 892–896 (1998).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  4. Markram, H. & Tsodyks, M. Nature 382, 807–810 (1996).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  5. Abbott, L. F., Varela, J. A., Sen, K. & Nelson, S. B. Science 275, 220–224 (1997).
    Google Scholar
  6. O'Donovan, M. J. & Rinzel, J. Trends Neurosci. 20, 431–433 (1997).
    Google Scholar
  7. Abraham, W. C. & Bear, M. F. Trends Neurosci. 19, 126–130 (1996).
    Google Scholar
  8. Glanzman, D. L., Kandel, E. R. & Schacher, S. Neuron 7, 903–913 (1991).
    Google Scholar
  9. Willshaw, D. G. & Von der Malsburg, C. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 194, 431–445 (1976).
    Google Scholar
  10. Miller, K. D. Neuron 17, 371–374 (1996).
    Google Scholar
  11. Turrigiano, G., Abbott, L. F. & Marder, E. Science 264, 974–977 (1994).
    Google Scholar
  12. Chen, W. R., Midtgaard, J. & Shepherd, G. M. Science 278, 463–467 (1997).
    Google Scholar
  13. Fitzsimonds, R. M., Song, H. J. & Poo, M. M. Nature 388, 439–448 (1997).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  14. Liu, G. & Tsien, R. W. Nature 375, 404–408 (1995).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  15. Tong, G., Malenka, R. C. & Nicoll, R. A. Neuron 16, 1147–1157 (1996).
    Google Scholar
  16. Bienenstock, E., Cooper, L. N. & Munro, P. J. Neurosci. 2, 32–48 (1982).
    Google Scholar
  17. Bear, M. F. Neuron 15, 1–4 (1995).
    Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Equipe Cognisciences, Institut Alfred Fessard, CNRS, 91198, Gif sur Yvette, France
    Yves Frégnac

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Frégnac, Y. Homeostasis or synaptic plasticity?.Nature 391, 845–846 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/35996

Download citation

This article is cited by