The Journal of Neuroscience Society for Neuroscience

Skip to main page content

1. No "discrepancy" in findings between Glajch et al. (2016) and Wall et al. (2013) papers

   • Nicholas R. Wall, Postdoctoral Scholar

   Stanford University

   A claim is made in the discussion that:

   "While this corroborates our earlier findings (Hernandez et al., 2015), it is at odds with those of a previous study (Wall et al., 2013) that showed no input from the GPe to SPNs using similar approaches. The reason for this discrepancy is unclear, but it may be due to nuanced differences in the viral preparations."

   The reason for the lack of reporting of GP inputs to striatum is clearly stated in the main text of the Wall et al. (2013) paper.

   "A few cells in the GP were sometimes labeled (Figure 2A), indicating that these cells likely provide direct input to neurons in the dorsal striatum (Bevan et al., 1998). However, due to their proximity to the injection site, these inputs were not analyzed further."

   Due to the virus injection site's proximity to the GP border, I could not guarantee that labeled cells were due to monosynaptic retrograde infection rather than direct infection. As such, GP inputs were excluded from the analysis.

   Conflict of Interest:

   None declared

   Submit response
   Published May 19, 2016