Skip to main content

Umbrella menu

  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Latest Articles
    • Issue Archive
    • Editorials
    • Research Highlights
  • 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
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • BLOG
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
  • My alerts

eNeuro

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Latest Articles
    • Issue Archive
    • Editorials
    • Research Highlights
  • 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
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • BLOG
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
PreviousNext
Research ArticleResearch Article: New Research, Sensory and Motor Systems

Developmental PCB Exposure Disrupts Synaptic Transmission and Connectivity in the Rat Auditory Cortex, Independent of Its Effects on Peripheral Hearing Threshold

Christopher M. Lee, Renee N. Sadowski, Susan L. Schantz and Daniel A. Llano
eNeuro 22 January 2021, 8 (1) ENEURO.0321-20.2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0321-20.2021
Christopher M. Lee
1Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Renee N. Sadowski
1Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Susan L. Schantz
1Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
3Department of Comparative Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61802
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel A. Llano
1Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
2Department of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Daniel A. Llano
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

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

    Experimental design and summary timeline of PCB treatment. Rows indicate significant experimental timepoints: beginning of dosing (day 0), pairing with male (day 28), parturition (approximately day 56), and weaning (approximately day 77).

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

    Comparison of ABR thresholds. A, Comparison of ABR thresholds in response to noise between control (blue) and PCB (red) treatments. Boxplots indicate median (horizontal bar), 25th and 75th percentiles (box), range of non-outlier points (vertical whiskers), and outliers (crosses). Black asterisks indicate significant comparisons; *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001. B, Comparison of thresholds to 4-, 8-, 16-, and 32-kHz tones.

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

    Image of auditory cortex slice and example voltage-clamp recording. A, Example image of recording electrode placement in a coronal slice containing auditory cortex. Recording pipette walls are highlighted in yellow lines. B, Example of membrane current recorded in voltage clamp with holding potential of −65 mV and bath application of 20 μm GABAzine.

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

    Comparison of spontaneous and miniature synaptic currents. A, Comparison of frequency of synaptic currents between control (blue) and PCB-treated (red) neurons (sample sizes indicate numbers of neurons). Boxplots indicate median (horizontal bar), 25th and 75th percentiles (box), range of non-outlier points (vertical whiskers), and outliers (crosses). Black asterisks indicate significant comparisons, *p < 0.05. B, Relationship of ABR threshold and sIPSC frequency for control (blue points) and PCB-exposed (red points) groups. Dashed lines indicate robust linear regression fits.

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

    Demonstration of LSPS mapping of input charge. A, Example image demonstrating positions of stimulation grid and recording electrodes in a coronal slice containing auditory cortex. Cyan points mark the sites of the 32 × 32 photostimulation grid. Recording pipette walls are highlighted in yellow lines. In the example, current recordings were simultaneously collected from two neurons. B, An example photostimulation-evoked current response from the cell positioned on the bottom right. Holding potential was −65 mV. Timing of the laser pulse (1 ms in duration) is indicated by the red arrowhead. A pronounced negative peak begins shortly after the laser onset. C, Map of input charge from current responses to photostimulation at all sites of the 32 × 32 stimulation grid. For recordings of excitatory responses, measured charge is inverted to positive values, and represented by color. D, Distribution of all IPSC latencies across all neurons in this study. The black arrow corresponds to the latency used to distinguish between direct and synaptic events in this study.

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

    Group averaged maps of photostimulation-evoked synaptic strength. Photostimulation-evoked input maps of charge (A) and amplitude (B) aligned to the recorded cell body. Measured charge at each site is averaged across all cells from each treatment group and is represented in color. EPSC charge maps are presented in the top plots, and IPSC charge maps are presented in the bottom plots. Black vertical scale bar marks 200 μm.

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

    Comparison of photostimulation-evoked currents between treatments. Comparison of total excitatory (A) and inhibitory (B) input charge, input area, and input distance, between control (blue) and PCB-exposed (red) treated neurons. Boxplots indicate median (horizontal bar), 25th and 75th percentiles (box), range of non-outlier points (vertical whiskers), and outliers (crosses). Black asterisks indicate significant comparisons; *p < 0.05. C, Ratio of excitatory to inhibitory charge between control and PCB-exposed groups.

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

    Spatial profile of synaptic input. Distance profile of input charge and connection probability for control (blue) and PCB-exposed (red) treatment groups. Response measures are binned by input distance in 80-μm bins, and interpolation between bin means are marked by the solid lines. The shaded areas indicate 1 standard error bounds around the means.

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 8 (1)
eNeuro
Vol. 8, Issue 1
January/February 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
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.
Developmental PCB Exposure Disrupts Synaptic Transmission and Connectivity in the Rat Auditory Cortex, Independent of Its Effects on Peripheral Hearing Threshold
(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
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Developmental PCB Exposure Disrupts Synaptic Transmission and Connectivity in the Rat Auditory Cortex, Independent of Its Effects on Peripheral Hearing Threshold
Christopher M. Lee, Renee N. Sadowski, Susan L. Schantz, Daniel A. Llano
eNeuro 22 January 2021, 8 (1) ENEURO.0321-20.2021; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0321-20.2021

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
Developmental PCB Exposure Disrupts Synaptic Transmission and Connectivity in the Rat Auditory Cortex, Independent of Its Effects on Peripheral Hearing Threshold
Christopher M. Lee, Renee N. Sadowski, Susan L. Schantz, Daniel A. Llano
eNeuro 22 January 2021, 8 (1) ENEURO.0321-20.2021; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0321-20.2021
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

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

Keywords

  • auditory cortex
  • laser photostimulation
  • patch-clamp
  • PCB
  • toxin
  • uncaging

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

  • Using Cortical Neuron Markers to Target Cells in the Dorsal Cochlear Nucleus
  • Parvalbumin Interneurons Are Differentially Connected to Principal Cells in Inhibitory Feedback Microcircuits along the Dorsoventral Axis of the Medial Entorhinal Cortex
  • Traumatic brain injury broadly affects GABAergic signaling in dentate gyrus granule cells
Show more Research Article: New Research

Sensory and Motor Systems

  • Otoacoustic emissions evoked by the time-varying harmonic structure of speech
  • Robustness to Noise in the Auditory System: A Distributed and Predictable Property
  • Interlimb transfer of reach adaptation does not require an intact corpus callosum:Evidence from patients with callosal lesions and agenesis
Show more Sensory and Motor Systems

Subjects

  • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • 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 Policy
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2021 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.