Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleResearch Article: New Research, Neuronal Excitability

Cannabinoid Signaling Recruits Astrocytes to Modulate Presynaptic Function in the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus

Lauren M. Hablitz, Ali N. Gunesch, Olga Cravetchi, Michael Moldavan and Charles N. Allen
eNeuro 21 January 2020, 7 (1) ENEURO.0081-19.2020; https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0081-19.2020
Lauren M. Hablitz
1Oregon Institute of Occupational Health Sciences, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239
2Department of Behavioral Neuroscience, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR 97239
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Lauren M. Hablitz
Ali N. Gunesch
1Oregon Institute of Occupational Health Sciences, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Olga Cravetchi
1Oregon Institute of Occupational Health Sciences, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael Moldavan
1Oregon Institute of Occupational Health Sciences, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Michael Moldavan
Charles N. Allen
1Oregon Institute of Occupational Health Sciences, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239
2Department of Behavioral Neuroscience, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR 97239
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Charles N. Allen
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    WIN decreases mGPSC frequency in a CB1R and astrocyte-dependent manner. For all frequency and amplitude plots gray lines are individual cells, black lines indicate the group average. A, Individual cell and mean mGPSC frequencies before and after treatment with either DMSO (0.01%) or WIN (3 μM). B, Individual cell and mean amplitudes of mGPSCs before and after DMSO or WIN application. C, Representative mGPSC current recordings before and after treatment with DMSO or WIN. D, Individual cell and mean mGPSC frequency (top) and amplitude (bottom) pretreatment, with AM251 (5 μM), and with both AM251 (5 μM) and WIN (3 μM). E, Representative mGPSC recordings from a single neuron before and during treatment, with AM251, and with AM251 and WIN. F, Individual cell mGPSC frequency (top) and amplitude (bottom) before and during application of FC (1 μM), and with both FC (1 μM) and WIN (3 μM). G, Representative mGPSC recordings from a single neuron before and during treatment with FC, and with FC and WIN; *p < 0.001, repeated measures analysis.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Chloride sensor expression in GFAP-Cre+ animals is specific to GFAP expressing astrocytes and not neurons or glial precursor cells. A–F, GFAP labeling (left), Cl sensor YFP fluorescence (center), and colocalization (right) within the SCN of GFAP-Cre+/Cl sensor+ animals. G–L, NFHC neuronal marker (left), Cl sensor YFP (center), and lack of colocalization (right) within the SCN. Scale bars are all 50 μm, images A–C and G–I were taken at 20× and images D–F and J–L were taken at 40×.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    WIN activates an astrocytic Ca2+ signaling pathway. A–D, top, Representative GCaMP6 images from slices treated with DMSO (0.01%), WIN (3 μM), WIN (3 μM) + TTX (1 μM) + CNQX (10 μM), and WIN (3 μM) + thapsigargin (1 μM; Thap). White scale bar is 50 μm, images taken at 40× and the inserts magnified 120×. Bottom, Representative traces showing the change in fluorescence from all regions measured (gray) and average response (black) from the slice depicted above. Black arrow indicates beginning of treatment. E–H, top, Pie charts depicting percentage of soma and non-soma regions across all slices responding with an increase (black), decrease (dark gray), variable response (light gray), or no response (white) to DMSO, WIN, WIN + TTX + CNQX, or WIN + Thap (left to right). Bottom, Cumulative average fluorescence increase during baseline and drug treatment for soma and non-soma regions across all slices.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Blockade of CB1R alters the frequency of spontaneous astrocytic Ca2+ events. A, Representative GCaMP6 image. White scale bar is 50 μm, image taken at 40×. White, numbered ellipses are the ROIs plotted in B. B, Representative traces of intensity 180 s before, during, and after AM251 treatment (indicated by black bar). Numbers 1–4 correspond to numbered regions in A. Note that the event examples were picked to reflect the varying responses to AM251 with traces 2 and 3 showing a clear reduction in frequency. C, Average event numbers across all experiments of regions before, during, and after AM251 treatment depicted as mean ± SEM (*p < 0.05, Friedman test). D, Average percentage of regions responding with a decrease, increase, or no change on treatment with AM251 across all experiments (mean ± SEM). E, Cumulative probability curves of amplitude for both soma (top) and non-soma (bottom) regions before, during, and after treatment with AM251.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Neurons utilize endocannabinoid signaling to activate astrocyte Ca2+ signaling pathways. A, Representative bright field (top) and GCaMP6 (bottom) images from a single slice. White scale bar is 50 μm, images taken at 40×. White arrow indicates the placement of the microelectrode tip. Numbered ellipses correspond to locations of traces in B. B, Representative intensity changes from the regions marked in A before and after depolarization of an SCN neuron (indicated by black bar) before (left) and during (right) AM251 (5 μM) treatment. C, Average number of events pre- and post-depolarization, before, during, and after treatment with AM251 across all experiments (mean ± SEM, *p < 0.05, Friedman test). D, Cumulative percentage of regions per change in event number from depolarization, before, during, and after AM251. E, Boxplot of event amplitudes pre- and post-depolarization, before, during, and after treatment with AM251.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Adenosine signaling is necessary for WIN-induced mGPSC frequency changes. A, top, Representative traces pretreatment (left), with ACPTII (middle), and with ACPTII+WIN (right) from an individual neuron. Bottom, Individual cell mGPSC frequency (left) and amplitude (right) before, during application of ACPTII (200 μM), and both ACPTII (200 μM) + WIN (3 μM; *p < 0.05, repeated measures analysis). B, top, Representative traces pretreatment (left), with CGS15943 (CGS, middle), and with CGS +WIN (right) from an individual neuron. Bottom, Individual cell mGPSC frequency and amplitude pretreatment, with CGS (50 μM), and both CGS (50 μM) and WIN (3 μM). C, top, Representative traces (left) pretreatment, with DPCPX (middle), and with DPCPX +WIN (right) from an individual neuron. Bottom, Individual cell and mean mGPSC frequency (left) and amplitude (right) pretreatment, with DPCPX (0.2 μM), and both DPCPX (0.2 μM) and WIN (3 μM). For all frequency and amplitude plots, gray lines indicate individual neuron responses, black lines represent group averages.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    Adenosine decreases the mGPSC frequency. A, Representative mGPSC recordings from a single SCN neuron before and during adenosine (100 μM) application. Frequency (B) and amplitude (C) of mGPSCs before and during adenosine treatment. Gray lines are individual cells, black represents the group average; *p = 0.05.

  • Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Activation of Gq DREADDs increases intracellular Ca2+ in astrocytes. A, Representative SCN slice of a GFAP-Cre+ mouse injected with Gq DREADD and GCaMP6. Scale bar is 50 μm, images taken at 40× and the inserts magnified 120×. B, Fluorescent intensity over time of the slice shown in A. Black arrow indicates the CNO (10 μM) application. Gray lines are individual regions, the black line is the average response of regions. C, Pie charts depict the percentage of regions that increase (black), decrease (dark gray), have a variable response (light gray), or do not respond (white) to CNO treatment across all experiments. D, Average fluorescent intensity before and after CNO application displayed as mean ± SEM for soma and non-soma regions.

  • Figure 9.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 9.

    Astrocytic Gq DREADD activation decreases mGPSC frequency in an A1R-dependent manner. A, Representative mGPSC traces before and after CNO (10 μM) application from a single neuron. Frequency (B) and amplitude (C) of mGPSCs before and after CNO (10 μM) treatment (*p < 0.05, repeated measures analysis). Gray lines are individual neurons, the black line is the group average. D, Representative mGPSC recordings before treatment, with DPCPX (0.2 μM), and with both DPCPX (0.2 μM) + CNO (10 μM) from a single neuron. Frequency (E) and amplitude (F) of mGPSCs before treatment, with DPCPX, and DPCPX+CNO. Gray lines are individual neurons, the black line is the group average.

  • Figure 10.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 10.

    Daytime application of either WIN (3 μM) or adenosine (100 μM) phase advanced the molecular clock. A, Representative bioluminescence recordings from two separate slices, one control (black) the other WIN (3 μM) treated (red), over 8 d. Treatment artifact is indicated by the black rectangle. B, Box plot of phase shifts of all the cultures after treatment with either control (white) or WIN (red), DPCPX (light gray), or WIN+DPCPX (dark gray; *p < 0.05). C, Representative bioluminescence recordings from two separate slices, one control (black) and the other adenosine (100 μM) treated (blue), over 7 d. Treatment artifact is indicated by the black rectangle. D, Box plot of phase shifts of SCN slice cultures after treatment with either control (black) or adenosine (blue; *p < 0.05).

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    mGPSC frequency data (Hz) for whole-cell electrophysiology experiments

    Frequency (Hz)
    Group meansMean of within cell ratio
    Treatment 1ControlTreatment 1Treatment 2Treatment 1/controlTreatment 2/control
    MeanSEMMeanSEMMeanSEMMeanSEMMeanSEM
    DMSO40.575.2237.644.87--0.950.04--
    WIN64.9813.7750.5012.36--0.740.04--
    CNO48.5611.0441.0710.01--0.820.04--
    Adenosine42.034.6333.753.80--0.790.05--
    Treatment 2: WIN (3 μM)
    AM25157.4614.6054.2213.3253.1412.320.970.060.950.03
    FC34.705.4635.786.1333.735.671.020.040.980.09
    ACPTII34.145.0732.865.0828.304.650.960.030.810.04
    CGS38.788.2538.506.9336.866.531.040.051.000.05
    DPCPX44.924.8342.294.7742.485.400.940.030.990.06
    Treatment 2: CNO (10 μM)
    DPCPX39.083.2537.873.7934.833.010.960.040.940.07
    • The treatment/control ratio was calculated for each recorded neuron and then averaged for each treatment group.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    mGPSC amplitude data (pA) for the whole-cell electrophysiology experiments

    Amplitude (pA)
    Group meansMean of within cell ratio
    Treatment 1ControlTreatment 1Treatment 2Treatment 1/controlTreatment 2/control
    MeanSEMMeanSEMMeanSEMMeanSEMMeanSEM
    DMSO45.758.8843.418.01--0.920.02--
    WIN36.766.5534.065.70--0.930.02--
    CNO39.888.4039.207.53--1.030.07--
    Adenosine38.544.7237.434.56--0.970.03--
    Treatment 2: WIN (3 μM)
    AM25134.857.3837.408.0332.907.081.060.091.040.10
    FC72.4827.4170.9625.9765.6521.340.960.030.910.07
    ACPTII45.317.9943.767.0241.326.200.990.030.960.05
    CGS48.6910.4948.9610.3446.4010.301.010.020.940.03
    DPCPX61.7214.9857.2913.1455.1211.720.960.030.920.04
    Treatment 2: CNO (10 μM)
    DPCPX41.305.7440.686.4837.666.370.960.030.870.05
    • The treatment/control ratio was calculated for each recorded neuron and then averaged for each treatment group.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Statistics for the data shown in Figures 1-Figures 3

    FigureStatistical testStatistics outputN
    Fig. 1A,B WIN: 10 neurons, 4 mice, DMSO: 21 neurons, 7 mice
    mGPSC frequency: DMSO × WINANOVAF(1,28) = 14.704, p = 0.001 
    mGPSC amplitude: DMSO × WINANOVAF(1,29) = 0.598, p = 0.445 
    Fig. 1D AM251: 5 neurons, 3 mice
    mGPSC frequency: DMSO × AM251ANOVAF(1,30) = 1.153, p = 0.292 
    mGPSC amplitude: DMSO × AM251ANOVAF(1,30) = 2.975, p = 0.095 
    mGPSC frequency: AM251 × AM251 + WINRepeated measures ANOVAF(2,8) = 1.719, p = 0.239 
    Fig. 1F FC: 8 neurons, 3 mice
    mGPSC frequency: DMSO × FCANOVAF(1,28) = 3.52, p = 0.071 
    Fig. 3A,B,E,F WIN: 4 mice, 6 slices, 38 soma (s), 194 non-soma (ns)
    Increase magnitude: treatment (WIN/DMSO) × ROI (s/ns)Kruskal–WallisH(3) = 169.052, p < 0.001DMSO: 3 mice, 4 slices, 70 s, 86 ns
    Increase magnitude DMSO: s × nsMedian post hocp = 1 
    Increase magnitude WIN: s × nsMedian post hocp = 1 
    Increase magnitude (both s and ns): DMSO × WINMedian post hocp < 0.001 
    Decrease magnitude: treatment (WIN/DMSO) × ROI (s/ns)Kruskal–WallisH(3) = 60.729, p < 0.001 
    Decrease magnitude DMSO: s × nsMedian post hocp = 1 
    Decrease magnitude WIN: s × nsMedian post hocp = 1 
    Increase magnitude (both s and ns): DMSO × WINMedian post hocp < 0.01 
    Fig. 3C,G TTX + CNQX + WIN: 4 mice, 5 slices, 19 s, 93 ns
    Increase magnitude: treatment (WIIN/ TTX + CNQX + WIN) × ROI (s/ns)Kruskal–WallisH(3) = 13.35, p = 0.004 
    Increase magnitude ns: WIN × TTX + CNQX + WINMedian post hocp = 0.017 
    Decrease magnitude: treatment (WIIN/ TTX + CNQX + WIN) × ROI (s/ns)Kruskal–WallisH(3) = 2.213, p = 0.529 
    • View popup
    Table 4.

    Statistics for the data shown in Figure 4

    FigureStatistical testStatistics outputN
    Fig. 3D,H Thapsigargin + WIN: 3 mice, 4 slices, 11 soma (s), 97 non-soma (ns)
    Increase magnitude: treatment (WIN/ Thap + WIN) × ROI (s/ns)Kruskal–WallisH(3) = 14.685, p = 0.002 
    Fig. 4AM251: 4 mice, 8 slices, 175 s, 818 ns
    Decreased events in s: event number × time (base, AM251, wash)Friedmanχ2(2) = 83.089, p < 0.0001 
    Base to AM251Wilcoxon signed-rankZ = –7.621, p < 0.0001 
    Base to washWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –3.732, p < 0.0001 
    AM251 to washWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –2.275, p = 0.001 
    Decreased events in ns: event number × time (base, AM251, wash)FriedmanX2(2) = 394.339, p < 0.0001 
    Base to AM251Wilcoxon signed-rankZ = –16.763, p < 0.0001 
    Base to washWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –8.882, p < 0.0001 
    AM251 to washWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –7.578, p < 0.0001 
    Increased events in s: event number × time (base, AM251, wash)Friedmanχ2(2) = 54.926, p = 0.000 
    Base to AM251Wilcoxon signed-rankZ = –6.740, p < 0.0001 
    Base to washWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –3.090, p = 0.002 
    AM251 to washWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –2.953, p = 0.003 
    Increased events in ns: event number × time (base, AM251, wash)FriedmanX2(2) = 302.035, p = 0.000 
    Base to AM251Wilcoxon signed-rankZ = –14.338, p < 0.0005 
    Base to washWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –5.648, p < 0.0005 
    AM251 to washWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –9.564, p < 0.0005 
    • View popup
    Table 5.

    Statistics for the data shown in Figures 5-Figures 8

    FigureStatistical testStatistics outputN
    Fig. 5Depol + AM251: 9 neurons, 4 mice, 225 ROIs [soma (s) and non-soma (ns)]
    Change in events: events (pre/post depol) × time (base, AM251, wash)Friedmanχ2(5) = 155.838, p < 0.0005 
    Pre to post baseWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –5.418, p < 0.0005 
    Pre to post AM251Wilcoxon signed-rankZ = –7.401, p < 0.0005 
    Pre to post WashWilcoxon signed-rankZ = –1.755, p = 0.079 
    Fig. 6A  ACPTII: 9 neurons, 3 mice
    mGPSC frequency: DMSO × ACPTIIANOVAF(1,28) = 0.746, p = 0.395 
    mGPSC amplitude: DMSO × ACPTIIANOVAF(1,28) = 2.135, p = 0.155 
    mGPSC frequency: ACPTII × ACPTII + WINANOVAF(1,8) = 19.527, p = 0.002 
    mGPSC amplitude: ACPTII × ACPTII + WINANOVAF(1,8) = 3.206, p = 0.067 
    Fig. 6BCGS: 8 neurons, 3 mice
    mGPSC frequency: DMSO × CGS15943 (CGS)ANOVAF(1,28) = 1.539, p = 0.225 
    mGPSC frequency: CGS × CGS + WINANOVAF(1,7) = 1.754, p = 0.227 
    Fig. 6CDPCPX: 12 neurons, 4 mice
    mGPSC frequency: DMSO × DPCPXANOVAF(1,31) = 0.03, p = 0.863 
    mGPSC amplitude: DMSO × DPCPXANOVAF(1,31) = 0.032, p = 0.858 
    mGPSC frequency: DPCPX × DPCPX + WINANOVAF(1,11) = 0.007, p = 0.935 
    mGPSC amplitude: DPCPX × DPCPX + WINANOVAF(1,11) = 2.353, p = 0.153 
    Fig. 7Adenosine: 15 neurons, 4 mice
    mGPSC frequency: DMSO × adenosineANOVAF(1,32) = 4.144, p = 0.05 
    mGPSC amplitude: DMSO × adenosineANOVAF(1,32) = 4.041, p = 0.053 
    Fig. 8CNO: 7 slices, 54 s, 265 ns
    Increase magnitude CNO:
    s × ns
    Mann–Whitney UU = 2667, p = 0.95 
    Increase magnitude: treatment (CNO/ Thap + CNO) × ROI (s/ns)Kruskal–WallisH(3) = 15.400, p = 0.001Thap + CNO: 3 mice, 7 s, 64 ns
    Increase magnitude ns: CNO × Thap + CNOMedian post hocp = 0.022 
    • View popup
    Table 6.

    Statistics for the data shown in Figures 9, 10

    FigureStatistical testStatistics outputN
    Fig. 9  
    mGPSC frequency:
    DMSO × CNO
    ANOVAF(1,30) = 5.642,p = 0.024CNO: 10 neurons, 3 mice
    mGPSC amplitude:
    DMSO × CNO
    ANOVAF(1,30) = 2.205,p = 0.148
    mGPSC frequency:
    DPCPX × DPCPX + CNO
    ANOVAF(1,10) = 0.7, p = 0.422CNO + DPCPX: 12 neurons, 4 mice
    mGPSC amplitude:
    DPCPX × DPCPX + CNO
    ANOVAF(1,10) = 2.515,p = 0.144
    mGPSC frequency:
    DMSO × CNOwoDREADD
    ANOVAF(1,30) = 1.334,
    p = 0.257
    CNOwoDREADD:
    10 neurons, 3 mice
    mGPSC amplitude:
    DMSO × CNOwoDREADD
    ANOVAF(1,30) = 0.731, p = 0.4
    Fig. 10  
    Phase shift: slice × treatment
    (control/WIN/DPCPX/WIN+DPCPX)
    Repeated measures ANOVAF(3,28) = 15.014,
    p < 0.001
    8 mice per group
    Period change WIN experiments:
    pre and post only
    Repeated Measures ANOVAF(1,28) = 0.163,
    p = 0.69
    8 mice per group
    Period change WIN experiments:
    pre and post × treatment
    Repeated measures ANOVAF(1,28) = 0.860,
    p = 0.474
    8 mice per group
    Phase shift: slice × treatment (adenosine/control)Repeated measures ANOVAF(1,13.38) = 5.663,
    p = 0.032
    7–11 mice per group
    Period change adenosine:
    pre and post only
    Repeated measures ANOVAF(1,16) = 10.816,
    p = 0.005
    7–11 mice per group
    Period change adenosine:
    pre and post × treatment
    Repeated measures ANOVAF(1,16) = 0.568,
    p = 0.462
    7–11 mice per group
Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 7 (1)
eNeuro
Vol. 7, Issue 1
January/February 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Cannabinoid Signaling Recruits Astrocytes to Modulate Presynaptic Function in the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Cannabinoid Signaling Recruits Astrocytes to Modulate Presynaptic Function in the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus
Lauren M. Hablitz, Ali N. Gunesch, Olga Cravetchi, Michael Moldavan, Charles N. Allen
eNeuro 21 January 2020, 7 (1) ENEURO.0081-19.2020; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0081-19.2020

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Cannabinoid Signaling Recruits Astrocytes to Modulate Presynaptic Function in the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus
Lauren M. Hablitz, Ali N. Gunesch, Olga Cravetchi, Michael Moldavan, Charles N. Allen
eNeuro 21 January 2020, 7 (1) ENEURO.0081-19.2020; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0081-19.2020
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Visual Abstract
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • astrocyte
  • circadian rhythm
  • endocannabinoid
  • GABA
  • Suprachiasmatic Nucleus

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Research Article: New Research

  • sAPPα inhibits neurite outgrowth in primary mouse neurons via GABA B Receptor subunit 1a
  • When Familiar Faces Feel Better: A Framework for Social Neurocognitive Aging in a Rat Model
  • The neurexin1β histidine-rich domain is involved in excitatory presynaptic organization and short-term plasticity
Show more Research Article: New Research

Neuronal Excitability

  • The neurexin1β histidine-rich domain is involved in excitatory presynaptic organization and short-term plasticity
  • Fast Spiking Interneurons Autonomously Generate Fast Gamma Oscillations in the Medial Entorhinal Cortex with Excitation Strength Tuning ING–PING Transitions
  • Altered Excitability and Glutamatergic Synaptic Transmission in the Medium Spiny Neurons of the Nucleus Accumbens in Mice Deficient in the Heparan Sulfate Endosulfatase Sulf1
Show more Neuronal Excitability

Subjects

  • Neuronal Excitability
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2026 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.