Hubbry Logo
Postsynaptic potentialPostsynaptic potentialMain
Open search
Postsynaptic potential
Community hub
Postsynaptic potential
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Postsynaptic potential
Postsynaptic potential
Postsynaptic potential
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Postsynaptic potentials are changes in the membrane potential of the postsynaptic terminal of a chemical synapse. Postsynaptic potentials are graded potentials, and should not be confused with action potentials although their function is to initiate or inhibit action potentials. Postsynaptic potentials occur when the presynaptic neuron releases neurotransmitters into the synaptic cleft. These neurotransmitters bind to receptors on the postsynaptic terminal, which may be a neuron, or a muscle cell in the case of a neuromuscular junction.[1] These are collectively referred to as postsynaptic receptors, since they are located on the membrane of the postsynaptic cell. Postsynaptic potentials are important mechanisms by which neurons communicate with each other allowing for information processing, learning, memory formation, and complex behavior within the nervous system.[2]

Ion Involvement

[edit]

Ions can create excitatory or inhibitory potentials due to their unique reversal potentials and the membrane's permeability to each ion. The Nernst equation and Goldman equation can calculate membrane potential differences based on ion concentration, offering predictions into how ions can affect postsynaptic potentials.[3] Ions are subject to two main forces, diffusion and electrostatic repulsion. Ions will tend towards their equilibrium potential, which is the state where the diffusion force cancels out the force of electrostatic repulsion. When a membrane is at its equilibrium potential, there is no longer a net movement of ions.[4]

Neurons have a resting potential of about −70 mV. When a neurotransmitter binds to a postsynaptic receptor, this can lead to the opening or closing of ion channels, allowing ions to flow inside or outside of the cell, changing the membrane potential. When an ion channel opens and there is a net gain of positively charged ions, like sodium (Na+) and calcium (Ca2+), that flow into the cell, this creates excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSP) that depolarize the cell membrane increasing the likelihood of an action potential by bringing the neuron's potential closer to its firing threshold (about -55 mV).

The opposite can happen when the opening of ion channels results in the flow of negatively charged ions, like chloride (Cl−), into the cell, or positively charged ions, like potassium (K+), to flow out of the cell, creating inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSP) that hyperpolarize the cell membrane, decreasing the likelihood of an action potential by bringing the neuron's potential further away from its firing threshold.[5]

It is important to note that neurotransmitters are not inherently excitatory or inhibitory. A single neurotransmitter can bind to different types of receptors on the postsynaptic neuron, opening or closing specific ion channels coupled to the receptor.[6]

Relation to Action Potentials

[edit]

EPSPs and IPSPs are transient changes in the membrane potential. These changes in membrane potential occur at the postsynaptic membrane located on the dendrites or cell body of a neuron, specifically at the synapse where it receives signals from a presynaptic neuron.[7] EPSPs resulting from neurotransmitter release at a single synapse are generally too small to trigger an action potential spike in the postsynaptic neuron. However, a neuron may receive synaptic inputs from hundreds, if not thousands, of other neurons, with varying amounts of simultaneous input, so the combined activity of afferent neurons can cause large fluctuations in membrane potential or subthreshold membrane potential oscillations. If the postsynaptic cell is sufficiently depolarized, an action potential will occur. For example, in low-threshold spikes depolarizations by the T-type calcium channel occur at low, negative, membrane depolarizations resulting in the neuron reaching the threshold. Action potentials are not graded; they are an all-or-none response.

Algebraic summation

[edit]

Postsynaptic potentials are graded potentials, meaning that signals don't fully propagate down the neuron and decrease in strength as they spread along the membrane. Graded potentials can summate in space or in time to generate a large enough response to reach action potential threshold.[8] Postsynaptic potentials undergo spatial and temporal summation due to their graded nature.[9]

Spatial summation: When inputs are received simultaneously at nearby synapses, their postsynaptic potentials combine. Multiple excitatory inputs combine resulting in greater membrane depolarization (more positive). Multiple inhibitory inputs combine and deepen hyperpolarization of the membrane (more negative). If the cell is receiving both inhibitory and excitatory postsynaptic potentials, they can cancel each other out, or one can be stronger than the other, and the membrane potential will change by the difference between them.

Temporal summation: When a single synapse inputs that are close together in time, their potentials are also added together. Thus, if a neuron receives an excitatory postsynaptic potential, and then the presynaptic neuron fires again, creating another EPSP, then the membrane of the postsynaptic cell is depolarized by the total sum of all the EPSPs fired, potentially bringing it closer to threshold for firing an action potential.

Termination

[edit]
Two stages of activity at an excitatory glutamatergic synapse. A. Active synapse generating an EPSP. The presynaptic terminal releases glutamate into the synaptic cleft, shown binding to ionotropic glutamate receptors (e.g., AMPA receptors) on the postsynaptic membrane. Sodium ions (Na+) flow into the postsynaptic neuron through the open receptor channels depolarizing the membrane and generating an EPSP. B. Termination of synaptic activity via reuptake. Glutamate unbinds from the AMPA receptor and is then cleared from the synaptic cleft by glutamate transporters (e.g., EAATs) located on the presynaptic membrane. Glutamate molecules are shown being actively transported back into the presynaptic terminal for recycling or breakdown. The postsynaptic membrane is no longer depolarized, and the ionotropic receptors are inactive, indicating termination of the EPSP.

Termination of postsynaptic potentials begins when the neurotransmitter detaches from its receptor, allowing the receptor to return to its resting state. After the neurotransmitter detaches from the receptor, the neurotransmitters in the synaptic cleft can either be degraded by enzymes (e.g., acetylcholinesterase for acetylcholine) or can be taken back into the presynaptic neuron through reuptake mechanisms (e.g., EEAT glutamate transporters). Once the neurotransmitter is no longer bound to the receptor, the ion channels that were opened by receptor binding close, stopping ion flow. The membrane potential then returns to its resting membrane potential as ion concentrations normalize by diffusion and active transport mechanisms like the sodium-potassium pump.[10]

Postsynaptic Potential Applications

[edit]

Postsynaptic potentials are essential in how the brain processes information, integrates signals, and coordinates complex behaviors. These temporary changes in a neuron's membrane potential determine if a neuron will fire an action potential which allows neurons to communicate within neural circuits. The balance between EPSPs and IPSPs are necessary for maintaining neural stability and function. There are many different applications of postsynaptic potentials.

Neural Communication and Integration: Postsynaptic potentials allow neurons to integrate inputs from thousands of synapses, functioning as a "decision-making unit" within the brain.[7]

Learning and Memory: Neuroplasticity is the key mechanism whereby learning and memory happens. When neurons consistently fire together, their synaptic connections strengthen, a principle known as Hebbian theory.[11] Long-term potentiation (LTP) is one mechanism where repeated EPSPs occur, strengthening neural circuits involved in learning, allowing the brain to store information more effectively. Long-term depression (LTD) is another mechanism where IPSPs occur weakening less-used synapses, refining learning by filtering out unnecessary information.[12]

Motor Control: Postsynaptic potentials in motor neurons integrate signals from the brain and spinal cord to coordinate muscle movement. During voluntary movement, EPSPs activate motor neurons, while IPSPs inhibit opposing muscle groups to make sure smooth motion occurs.[13]

Neurodevelopment and Recovery: In neurodevelopmental and recovery processes, postsynaptic plasticity abilities allow neural pathways to rewire, leading to improved motor skills, language recovery, and adapted cognitive strategies.[14]

Pharmacology and Neurological Treatments: Improved understanding of postsynaptic potentials has guided the development of drugs that modulate synaptic strength to help in neurodegenerative diseases, depression, anxiety, etc.[15][16]

See also

[edit]
[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Postsynaptic potential

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A postsynaptic potential (PSP) is a graded change in the of a postsynaptic , triggered by release from a presynaptic , that modulates the likelihood of the postsynaptic generating an . These potentials arise when neurotransmitters diffuse across the synaptic cleft and bind to specific receptors on the postsynaptic , leading to the opening or closing of channels and subsequent flow that alters the membrane voltage from its resting state of approximately -60 to -70 mV. PSPs are classified into two primary types: excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs), which depolarize the membrane toward a more positive potential (often around 0 mV reversal potential) by permitting influx of cations like Na⁺ or efflux of anions, thereby increasing the probability of reaching the action potential threshold (typically -55 mV); and inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs), which hyperpolarize the membrane (reversal potential around -70 mV for Cl⁻-mediated or -80 mV for K⁺-mediated) or sometimes produce a shunting effect, decreasing the firing probability. EPSPs are commonly generated by excitatory neurotransmitters such as glutamate binding to ionotropic receptors like or NMDA, while IPSPs are typically produced by inhibitory neurotransmitters like GABA or acting on receptors such as GABA_A, which open Cl⁻ channels, or metabotropic receptors that indirectly modulate ion conductances for slower effects. Unlike all-or-nothing action potentials, PSPs are local, decremental signals that vary in based on input strength and do not propagate actively, but they can summate through temporal summation (overlapping inputs from the same in rapid succession) or spatial summation (simultaneous inputs from multiple synapses), allowing the postsynaptic to integrate excitatory and inhibitory signals at the axon hillock. This integration process is crucial for neural computation, decision-making in circuits, and underlies phenomena like , where repeated PSP patterns can strengthen or weaken connections, contributing to learning and memory in the .

Basic Concepts

Definition and Types

A postsynaptic potential (PSP) is a transient, graded change in the of a postsynaptic induced by the release of neurotransmitters from a presynaptic terminal, which alters the likelihood of the postsynaptic generating an . Unlike action potentials, PSPs are local events that decrementally propagate and do not typically trigger regenerative firing on their own. PSPs are primarily classified into two types based on their effect on the membrane potential: excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs) and inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs). An EPSP depolarizes the postsynaptic membrane, bringing it closer to the action potential threshold and increasing the probability of neuronal firing. In contrast, an IPSP hyperpolarizes the membrane, moving it further from the threshold and decreasing the likelihood of firing. Additionally, miniature PSPs (mPSPs) represent spontaneous, quantal events resulting from the release of single vesicles of neurotransmitter in the absence of presynaptic action potentials, serving as the basic unit of synaptic transmission. The concept of PSPs was first established in the 1950s through pioneering intracellular recording techniques in motoneurons, where John C. Eccles and colleagues identified and characterized EPSPs and IPSPs as distinct synaptic events underlying excitation and inhibition in the central nervous system.

Excitatory and Inhibitory PSPs

Excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs) are typically mediated by the neurotransmitters glutamate or acetylcholine, which bind to their respective receptors on the postsynaptic membrane, leading to an influx of sodium ions and an efflux of potassium ions through nonselective cation channels. This ionic movement causes a depolarization of the postsynaptic neuron, increasing the likelihood of reaching the threshold for an action potential. In central nervous system synapses, such as those in the cerebral cortex, glutamate is the primary excitatory neurotransmitter, producing EPSPs with typical amplitudes ranging from 0.5 to 5 mV and durations of 10 to 50 ms. At the neuromuscular junction, acetylcholine elicits larger EPSPs that reliably trigger action potentials in skeletal muscle fibers. In contrast, inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs) are primarily mediated by gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) or glycine, which activate receptors that facilitate the influx of anions like chloride or the efflux of cations, resulting in hyperpolarization of the postsynaptic membrane. This hyperpolarization moves the membrane potential further from the action potential threshold, thereby decreasing the probability of neuronal firing. IPSPs mediated by GABA or glycine in inhibitory synapses exhibit amplitudes of 0.5 to 5 mV and durations of 10 to 50 ms, reflecting the kinetics of the associated ion channels. For instance, glycine-mediated IPSPs are common in spinal cord interneurons, where they help coordinate motor reflexes by suppressing unwanted activity. Functionally, EPSPs facilitate the summation of synaptic inputs to drive neurons toward action potential initiation, enabling excitatory signaling in networks like the cortex for information processing. Conversely, IPSPs provide precise inhibition to modulate and refine neural output, preventing overexcitation and shaping circuit dynamics, as seen in the balance between excitatory cortical projections and inhibitory feedback.

Generation Mechanisms

Synaptic Transmission Process

Synaptic transmission begins when an arrives at the presynaptic terminal, depolarizing the and opening voltage-gated calcium channels, which allows Ca²⁺ influx into the terminal. This rapid increase in intracellular Ca²⁺ concentration, occurring within microseconds, binds to sensor proteins such as synaptotagmin, triggering the fusion of synaptic vesicles with the presynaptic through SNARE complex-mediated . The vesicles, each containing a quantum of , release their contents into the synaptic cleft in a process that completes in less than 1 millisecond. The released molecules diffuse across the synaptic cleft, a narrow typically 20-50 nm wide, to reach the postsynaptic membrane. Upon arrival, the binds to specific receptors on the postsynaptic side, initiating the generation of a postsynaptic potential (PSP). This release occurs in discrete quanta, with each typically triggering the of 1 to 1000 vesicles depending on the synapse type and conditions, ensuring reliable yet probabilistic transmission. The overall time course of this process is highly efficient: neurotransmitter release happens in under 1 ms following Ca²⁺ influx, and the onset of the PSP occurs approximately 0.5-2 ms after the presynaptic peak in fast mammalian synapses. This brief synaptic delay encompasses the Ca²⁺-dependent and diffusion across the cleft. The resulting PSP can be excitatory or inhibitory, depending on the involved.

Receptor Types and Activation

Postsynaptic receptors are broadly classified into two main types: ionotropic and metabotropic, each mediating distinct aspects of synaptic transmission leading to postsynaptic potentials (PSPs). Ionotropic receptors function as ligand-gated ion channels that directly transduce binding into rapid changes in membrane permeability, resulting in fast PSPs. Ionotropic receptors, such as the α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid () and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors for glutamate-mediated excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs) and the γ-aminobutyric acid type A () or receptors for GABA- or -mediated inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs), exhibit activation times typically under 1 due to their to channels. This swift activation enables precise, phasic signaling, where binding—such as glutamate to AMPA/NMDA or GABA to GABA_A—promptly opens the channel pore, allowing direct flux that shapes the initial PSP waveform. In contrast, metabotropic receptors are G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) that indirectly influence PSPs through intracellular second messenger cascades, producing slower and more prolonged modulatory effects. Examples include metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) for slower EPSPs and GABA_B receptors for IPSPs, where activation onset ranges from 50 to 500 milliseconds, often modulating the amplitude and duration of ionotropic receptor-mediated PSPs rather than generating them de novo. This delayed response arises from G-protein activation, which can alter conductance or trigger enzymatic pathways, thereby fine-tuning synaptic efficacy over longer timescales. The activation kinetics of these receptors, including binding affinity and desensitization rates, critically determine PSP shape and reliability. For instance, receptors bind glutamate with an of approximately 10 μM and rapid desensitization within a few milliseconds, which limits PSP duration and prevents overstimulation during sustained transmitter presence, thus maintaining temporal fidelity in excitatory signaling. Similarly, GABA_A receptors desensitize on a timescale of 10-50 milliseconds, contributing to the decay phase of fast IPSPs. Metabotropic receptors, with lower binding affinities and slower desensitization (often seconds), allow for cumulative modulation, where partial desensitization can prolong PSP effects during repetitive activity. These kinetic properties ensure that ionotropic receptors drive acute PSP peaks while metabotropic ones sculpt broader integration, collectively enabling adaptive neuronal computation.

Ionic Mechanisms

Key Ions and Channels

Excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs) primarily arise from the influx of cations through ligand-gated ion channels activated by glutamate. In most central synapses, α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid () receptors, which are non-NMDA glutamate receptors, permit the passage of sodium (Na⁺) and potassium (K⁺) ions with roughly equal permeability (P_Na/P_K ≈ 1), leading to net under physiological conditions. N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, another class of glutamate-gated channels, exhibit high permeability to calcium (Ca²⁺) ions in addition to Na⁺ and K⁺, contributing to Ca²⁺-dependent signaling processes. Inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs) are mediated by anions or outward K⁺ currents through channels activated by inhibitory neurotransmitters. γ-Aminobutyric acid type A () receptors and receptors are (Cl⁻)-selective ionotropic channels that allow Cl⁻ influx, hyperpolarizing the postsynaptic membrane when the Cl⁻ equilibrium potential is negative to the . In contrast, GABA type B (GABA_B) receptors are metabotropic and indirectly activate G-protein-coupled inwardly rectifying potassium (GIRK) channels, increasing K⁺ efflux to produce slower inhibitory effects. These channels display characteristic properties that influence PSP dynamics. NMDA receptors exhibit voltage-dependence due to a magnesium (Mg²⁺) block at resting potentials, which is relieved upon , allowing greater flow during coincident synaptic and postsynaptic activity. Single-channel conductances for postsynaptic channels typically range from 5 to 50 pS, with receptors showing low values around 8–20 pS, NMDA receptors 20–50 pS, GABA_A receptors approximately 25–30 pS, and receptors 35–45 pS, reflecting their subunit composition and ionic selectivity.

Reversal Potentials and Equilibrium

The reversal potential, denoted as ErevE_{\text{rev}}, represents the membrane voltage at which the net ionic current through open synaptic channels is zero, resulting in no net change in the postsynaptic potential (PSP) amplitude. This equilibrium point determines the direction and magnitude of the PSP, as synaptic activation alters membrane conductance to specific ions, driving the membrane potential toward ErevE_{\text{rev}}. For synapses selective to a single ion species, ErevE_{\text{rev}} is calculated using the Nernst equation: Eion=RTzFln⁡([ion]o[ion]i)E_{\text{ion}} = \frac{RT}{zF} \ln \left( \frac{[\text{ion}]_o}{[\text{ion}]_i} \right) where RR is the gas constant, TT is the absolute temperature, zz is the ion's valence, FF is Faraday's constant, and [ion]o[\text{ion}]_o and [ion]i[\text{ion}]_i are the extracellular and intracellular ion concentrations, respectively. Typical neuronal values yield ENa≈+60E_{\text{Na}} \approx +60 mV due to high extracellular sodium, EK≈−90E_{\text{K}} \approx -90 mV from elevated intracellular potassium, and ECl≈−70E_{\text{Cl}} \approx -70 mV reflecting chloride gradients maintained by transporters. In many synaptic conductances, multiple ions contribute, requiring the Goldman-Hodgkin-Katz (GHK) equation to compute ErevE_{\text{rev}}, which accounts for relative permeabilities (PP) of permeant ions: Erev=RTFln⁡(PK[K+]o+PNa[Na+]o+PCl[Cl−]iPK[K+]i+PNa[Na+]i+PCl[Cl−]o)E_{\text{rev}} = \frac{RT}{F} \ln \left( \frac{P_{\text{K}} [\text{K}^+]_o + P_{\text{Na}} [\text{Na}^+]_o + P_{\text{Cl}} [\text{Cl}^-]_i}{P_{\text{K}} [\text{K}^+]_i + P_{\text{Na}} [\text{Na}^+]_i + P_{\text{Cl}} [\text{Cl}^-]_o} \right) This formulation is essential for ionotropic receptors permeable to both cations and anions, such as those in excitatory glutamatergic synapses where ErevE_{\text{rev}} approximates 0 mV due to comparable sodium and potassium permeabilities. The driving force for the PSP, given by Vm−ErevV_m - E_{\text{rev}} (where VmV_m is the current membrane potential), determines the synaptic current Isyn=gsyn(Vm−Erev)I_{\text{syn}} = g_{\text{syn}} (V_m - E_{\text{rev}}), which dictates PSP polarity. For excitatory PSPs, where Erev>VmE_{\text{rev}} > V_m, Vm−Erev<0V_m - E_{\text{rev}} < 0, resulting in inward current through cation channels that depolarizes the membrane. For hyperpolarizing IPSPs, where Erev<VmE_{\text{rev}} < V_m (e.g., K⁺-mediated), Vm−Erev>0V_m - E_{\text{rev}} > 0, resulting in outward current that hyperpolarizes the membrane. For Cl⁻-mediated IPSPs where Erev≈VmE_{\text{rev}} \approx V_m, there is little net current but increased conductance leads to shunting. A key application arises in chloride-mediated inhibition, where EClE_{\text{Cl}} often nears the resting membrane potential (around -70 mV), minimizing hyperpolarizing drive but increasing conductance to shunt excitatory currents, thereby reducing neuronal excitability without significant voltage change. This shunting effect occurs because the elevated chloride permeability diverts current flow, effectively clamping local membrane resistance near ErevE_{\text{rev}}. Ions such as Na+^+, K+^+, and Cl−^- underpin these dynamics through their concentration gradients and channel selectivities.

Integration and Summation

Temporal and Spatial Summation

Temporal summation refers to the integration of postsynaptic potentials (PSPs) generated by repeated of the same over a short time period, where successive PSPs overlap due to high-frequency presynaptic firing. This process allows small, subthreshold excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs), typically lasting about 20 ms, to accumulate and potentially reach the threshold for an . For small EPSPs, temporal summation exhibits linear additivity, meaning the amplitude of the summed potential is approximately the algebraic sum of individual EPSPs without significant distortion. Spatial summation involves the simultaneous convergence of PSPs from multiple distinct synapses onto the dendrites or soma of a postsynaptic , enabling the to integrate inputs from different presynaptic sources. The effectiveness of this is influenced by dendritic cable properties, such as the space constant, which determines how far and how quickly a local PSP decays as it passively spreads along the dendrite toward the soma. Synapses located more proximally to the soma contribute larger somatic PSPs due to less , while distal synapses experience greater decay governed by the membrane's passive electrical properties. In hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons, temporal and spatial facilitate EPSP buildup, allowing weak individual inputs to collectively drive neuronal excitability. For instance, linear summation of EPSPs from oblique and basal dendrites has been observed, with combined inputs yielding amplitudes close to 100% of expected additivity under physiological conditions. Factors such as input resistance, typically ranging from 100 to 200 MΩ in these cells, modulate the magnitude of summation by affecting the voltage change produced by synaptic currents.

Algebraic and Nonlinear Integration

In algebraic summation, excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs) and inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs) combine through vector addition of their amplitudes to produce a net change in at the postsynaptic site. For instance, a single EPSP depolarizing the by approximately 0.5 mV may be offset by a concurrent IPSP hyperpolarizing it by 0.3 mV, yielding a net depolarization of 0.2 mV that reflects the integrated excitatory-inhibitory balance. This process allows neurons to compute the overall influence of multiple synaptic inputs, with the net potential serving as the basis for further signal . However, conductance changes introduced by synaptic prevent perfect , as increased total conductance reduces the membrane's input resistance and attenuates the voltage deflection from each input. The net postsynaptic potential can be approximated by considering the driving forces and conductances of individual synapses, given by ΔV≈∑igi(Ei−Vm)∑igi+gl,\Delta V \approx \frac{\sum_i g_i (E_i - V_m)}{\sum_i g_i + g_l}, where gig_i represents the conductance change for the ii-th synaptic input, EiE_i its reversal potential, VmV_m the prevailing , and glg_l the resting conductance. This equation illustrates sublinear effects: when synaptic conductances (∑gi\sum g_i) become comparable to or exceed glg_l, the denominator grows, compressing the potential change and diminishing the relative contribution of additional inputs. Such conductance-dependent nonlinearity ensures that is more efficient for sparse, low-conductance inputs but saturates under barrage-like activation, as seen in cortical networks during . Nonlinear integration arises prominently from voltage-dependent conductances, such as those mediated by NMDA receptors, which exhibit magnesium blockade relieved by , thereby amplifying EPSPs nonlinearly once the exceeds resting levels. This voltage sensitivity creates a threshold-like boost, where initial small depolarizations from receptors unblock NMDA channels, leading to regenerative calcium influx and enhanced that favors coincident excitatory inputs. Synaptic saturation further contributes to nonlinearity, as repeated or clustered activations maximize conductance without proportional voltage gains, limiting the scalability of in densely active synapses. IPSPs exert particularly potent nonlinear modulation through shunting inhibition, where conductances do not simply subtract from EPSPs but instead short-circuit excitatory currents by increasing parallel membrane pathways, effectively vetoing distal EPSPs without substantial hyperpolarization. This shunting is captured by an arithmetic rule incorporating a nonlinear interaction term: the net somatic potential Vs≈Vse+Vsi+k⋅Vse⋅VsiV_s \approx V_{se} + V_{si} + k \cdot V_{se} \cdot V_{si}, where VseV_{se} and VsiV_{si} are the individual EPSP and IPSP amplitudes, and kk (in mV⁻¹) quantifies shunting strength, which depends on the spatial proximity of excitatory and inhibitory synapses. For proximal inhibition on dendritic trunks, kk remains high and uniform across distal excitatory sites (space constant ≈83 μm), enabling broad vetoing, whereas branch-specific inhibition confines the effect, promoting compartmentalized .

Termination Processes

Neurotransmitter Removal

Neurotransmitter removal from the synaptic cleft is essential to terminate signaling and prevent prolonged activation of postsynaptic receptors. The primary mechanisms include via specific transporters, of unbound molecules away from the cleft, and enzymatic degradation, which collectively ensure rapid clearance to maintain precise temporal control of synaptic transmission. involves high-affinity transporters located on the presynaptic terminal or adjacent glial cells that actively transport neurotransmitters back into the cell for recycling or metabolism. For instance, the (SERT) facilitates the reuptake of serotonin from the cleft into presynaptic neurons, regulating serotonergic signaling. Similarly, GABA transporters such as GAT-1 remove gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) from the synaptic cleft, primarily into presynaptic terminals or , thereby terminating inhibitory postsynaptic potentials. These sodium-dependent transporters operate efficiently to recycle neurotransmitters, with uptake rates influenced by and extracellular ion concentrations. Diffusion allows unbound molecules to disperse passively from the synaptic cleft into the , reducing local concentrations and limiting receptor activation beyond the immediate synaptic region. This process is particularly significant for neurotransmitters not subject to rapid enzymatic breakdown or , and it often acts in concert with other clearance mechanisms to accelerate overall removal. Enzymatic degradation provides a complementary pathway, where specific enzymes hydrolyze neurotransmitters in the cleft. A prominent example is (AChE), which rapidly breaks down into choline and acetate, with a of less than 1 in the synaptic cleft, ensuring swift termination of cholinergic signaling at neuromuscular junctions and central synapses. Clearance time scales vary by neurotransmitter but are generally fast to support high-fidelity neural communication. For fast excitatory transmitters like glutamate, removal from the synaptic cleft occurs within 1-2 milliseconds, primarily through and uptake by glutamate transporters on and neurons, preventing and allowing rapid subsequent signaling events. These mechanisms collectively achieve clearance in the range of 1-10 milliseconds for most small-molecule s, underscoring their role in shaping the duration and specificity of postsynaptic potentials.

Postsynaptic Receptor Dynamics

Postsynaptic receptors exhibit dynamic changes that contribute to the termination and modulation of postsynaptic potentials (PSPs), primarily through mechanisms such as desensitization, internalization, and subsequent recovery processes. These dynamics ensure that synaptic responses are appropriately scaled and temporally controlled, preventing overstimulation while allowing for adaptive signaling. Desensitization involves the rapid inactivation of receptors during sustained binding, reducing their responsiveness without altering the number of surface receptors. For ionotropic glutamate receptors like receptors, this process occurs on a timescale of a few milliseconds following prolonged exposure to glutamate, transitioning the receptor from an activated to a non-conducting desensitized state. This inactivation is mediated by conformational changes in the ligand-binding domain, which stabilize a closed-channel conformation despite occupancy. Desensitization limits the duration of excitatory PSPs during repetitive synaptic activity, thereby shaping the of postsynaptic neurons. Internalization of postsynaptic receptors occurs via clathrin-mediated , removing receptors from the synaptic membrane and thereby attenuating PSP amplitude over longer timescales. In the case of receptors, is triggered following synaptic activity, often involving events regulated by kinases such as CaMKII, which can modulate trafficking pathways during plasticity. For instance, after long-term depression (LTD) induction, receptors may undergo increased internalization into recycling endosomes, facilitating their redistribution and maintenance of synaptic strength. This process is dynamin-dependent and interacts with adaptor proteins like AP-2 and epsin, ensuring selective removal of receptors from the postsynaptic density. Recovery from these dynamics encompasses resensitization and , restoring receptor function and surface expression to support ongoing PSP generation. Resensitization from desensitization typically occurs on a timescale of tens to hundreds of milliseconds as dissociates, allowing receptors to return to a responsive state. For internalized receptors, back to the plasma membrane takes seconds to minutes, involving endosomal sorting and , which impacts the frequency-dependent efficacy of PSPs by replenishing synaptic receptor pools. These recovery mechanisms, influenced by auxiliary subunits and states, enable neurons to adapt PSP summation to varying input patterns.

Relation to Action Potentials

Threshold Reaching and Firing

Postsynaptic potentials (PSPs) generated at synapses throughout the dendritic and soma integrate primarily at the axon initial segment (AIS), a specialized region at the proximal where the threshold for action potential initiation is lowest, typically around -55 mV. This site serves as the decision point for neuronal excitability, where the net effect of excitatory and inhibitory PSPs determines whether sufficient to trigger firing occurs. If the algebraic summation of PSPs depolarizes the membrane at the AIS to or beyond the , voltage-gated sodium (Na⁺) channels rapidly open, allowing a massive influx of Na⁺ ions that initiates the rising phase of the action potential. This event is all-or-none, meaning once threshold is reached, the action potential propagates with fixed amplitude and duration along the , in stark contrast to the graded, variable nature of PSPs that can vary in strength based on synaptic input magnitude. Through temporal and spatial , multiple PSPs can collectively drive the membrane toward this threshold. However, PSPs originating in distal dendrites often undergo significant passive decay before reaching the soma or AIS due to the cable properties of neuronal processes, characterized by the (λ), which typically ranges from approximately 0.1 to 1 mm in neurons. This reduces the amplitude of distal PSPs by factors that can exceed 100-fold by the time they influence the integration site, thereby modulating the overall excitatory drive and requiring stronger or more synchronized inputs to achieve threshold.

Role in Neural Signaling

Postsynaptic potentials (PSPs) function as fundamental local signals within neurons, enabling the integration of synaptic inputs to influence overall neuronal excitability and communication. Excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs), typically mediated by glutamate receptors, depolarize the postsynaptic membrane by allowing influx of cations such as sodium and calcium, thereby bringing the closer to the threshold required for (AP) initiation. This depolarization facilitates signal propagation when EPSPs summate to trigger an AP at the axon hillock, which then travels along the as a propagating electrical impulse for long-distance transmission across neural circuits. In contrast, inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs), often generated via GABA or receptors, hyperpolarize the membrane through or potassium efflux, suppressing AP generation and refining signal specificity by counteracting excitatory inputs. The excitatory-inhibitory (E/I) balance, governed by the relative strengths and frequencies of EPSPs and IPSPs, is essential for coordinated neural signaling and the emergence of network-level phenomena. This balance maintains in neuronal firing rates and supports oscillatory rhythms, such as gamma oscillations in the 30-80 Hz range, which arise from synchronized interactions between excitatory pyramidal cells and inhibitory , facilitating processes like sensory binding and . An optimal E/I ratio ensures that excitation drives activity while inhibition prevents runaway hyperexcitability, allowing for precise temporal coding in distributed circuits. Pathological disruptions in PSP dynamics underscore their critical role in neural signaling integrity. In epilepsy, an imbalance favoring excess EPSPs—often due to enhanced transmission or reduced inhibition—leads to neuronal hyperexcitability, culminating in synchronized burst firing and seizures that propagate uncontrollably through networks. Similarly, in , deficits in IPSPs, linked to impaired function of parvalbumin-expressing , disrupt the E/I balance, contributing to aberrant gamma rhythms and cognitive impairments such as disorganized thought and perceptual distortions. These imbalances highlight how PSPs not only mediate local computation but also underpin the stability of broader neural communication.

Physiological and Research Applications

Functions in Neural Circuits

Postsynaptic potentials (PSPs) are integral to , enabling adaptive changes in neural connectivity that underpin learning and . (LTP) represents a persistent increase in PSP amplitude at excitatory synapses, first demonstrated in the hippocampal following high-frequency stimulation, where repeated activation strengthens synaptic efficacy for hours or longer. This Hebbian form of LTP relies on N-methyl-D-aspartate ( activation, which detects coincident presynaptic glutamate release and postsynaptic to trigger calcium influx and downstream signaling cascades that enhance receptor-mediated excitatory PSPs (EPSPs). In contrast, long-term depression (LTD) induces a lasting reduction in PSP strength, often through prolonged low-frequency stimulation in the hippocampus, involving moderate NMDA receptor-dependent calcium elevations that promote of receptors and weaken EPSPs. Spike-timing-dependent plasticity (STDP) further refines these processes by modulating PSP amplitudes based on the precise millisecond-scale timing of pre- and postsynaptic spikes, with presynaptic activity preceding postsynaptic firing potentiating synapses (LTP-like) and the reverse inducing depression (LTD-like), as observed in cultured hippocampal neurons. In neural circuits, PSPs facilitate specialized computations such as coincidence detection and . In the , summation of parallel fiber-evoked EPSPs with climbing fiber inputs in dendrites enables temporal coincidence detection, where synchronized depolarizations trigger local calcium spikes that instruct via associative plasticity, as evidenced by dendritic in awake mice during sensory-motor tasks. Similarly, in the , nonlinear integration of distributed EPSPs and inhibitory PSPs (IPSPs) in pyramidal neuron dendrites supports , allowing selective amplification of correlated inputs to form feature-specific representations, such as orientation tuning in . Recent advances in have mapped these PSP contributions to , revealing how targeted synaptic in cortical layer 2/3 circuits drives precise behavioral outputs like sensory , with high-throughput two-photon stimulation uncovering input-specific connectivity patterns that correlate with perceptual performance post-2020. Glial cells, particularly , modulate PSPs through gliotransmission, adding a layer of circuit-level regulation. release gliotransmitters like glutamate or ATP in response to neuronal activity, which act on presynaptic receptors to alter release or directly influence postsynaptic receptors, thereby scaling EPSP amplitudes and fine-tuning . For instance, astrocytic glutamate release can enhance or suppress function, impacting LTP induction and overall circuit excitability in hippocampal and cortical networks. This tripartite interaction allows astrocytes to integrate over broader spatial and temporal scales than neurons alone, influencing PSP dynamics during sustained activity patterns.

Experimental Measurement Techniques

Postsynaptic potentials (PSPs) are primarily measured using electrophysiological techniques that directly record changes in or ionic currents at the postsynaptic . Intracellular recording with sharp microelectrodes, introduced in the mid-20th century, allows precise measurement of PSP amplitude and time course by impaling the and monitoring voltage fluctuations in response to synaptic stimulation. This method, refined in studies of and synapses, typically uses glass micropipettes filled with high-resistance solutions like to bridge the and record subthreshold depolarizations or hyperpolarizations with millivolt sensitivity. The patch-clamp technique, developed by Neher and Sakmann in the 1970s and awarded the in 1991, has become the gold standard for quantifying PSPs at the single-channel level. In whole-cell voltage-clamp mode, it isolates synaptic currents by holding the constant, enabling separation of excitatory (EPSCs) and inhibitory (IPSCs) components with picoampere resolution; for instance, in hippocampal slices, this reveals quantal events underlying PSPs with rise times under 1 ms. Current-clamp configurations further capture voltage dynamics, such as temporal summation of PSPs, in cultured neurons or brain slices. Optical imaging methods provide non-invasive alternatives for visualizing PSPs across neuronal populations, often indirectly through proxies like calcium influx. Calcium imaging using synthetic dyes like Fura-2, pioneered in the 1980s, detects PSP-evoked transients by monitoring fluorescence changes tied to activation, with spatial resolution down to dendritic spines in cortical slices. More recent advances employ genetically encoded calcium indicators (GECIs) such as GCaMP6, optimized in the 2010s for faster kinetics and higher signal-to-noise ratios, allowing in vivo detection of PSP-like events in behaving mice via two-photon microscopy; for example, these reveal synaptic integration in layer 2/3 pyramidal cells with sub-second temporal precision. Voltage-sensitive dyes (VSDs), such as Di-4-ANEPPS, directly report shifts optically, though with lower sensitivity than , and have been used to map PSP propagation in retinal networks. Genetically encoded voltage indicators (GEVIs), such as ArcLight (2012) and (2014), along with 2020s innovations like ASAP4 (2023) and ASAP5 (2024), enable all-optical PSP readout by combining optogenetic stimulation with to achieve millisecond-scale resolution without physical electrodes. These tools, expressed via viral vectors, enable chronic imaging in deep brain structures, correlating PSP amplitudes with behavioral states in freely moving animals. In vivo approaches extend these techniques to intact neural circuits, incorporating extracellular multi-electrode arrays for population-level PSP inference. Utah arrays or silicon probes, implanted in cortex or hippocampus, record (LFPs) that reflect summed PSPs, with spike-triggered averaging isolating unitary contributions; studies in have quantified PSP strengths during sensory processing with microvolt fidelity. facilitates precise PSP evocation and measurement by expressing in presynaptic terminals, allowing light-induced release while recording postsynaptic responses via patch-clamp or imaging in head-fixed mice. This has elucidated PSP dynamics in vivo, such as nonlinear integration in circuits, with quantal efficacy estimated from single-photon uncaging experiments. Quantal analysis, rooted in del Castillo and Katz's work on neuromuscular junctions, quantifies PSP variability to infer vesicle release statistics. In central synapses, variance-mean plots from repeated low-probability stimulation—often paired with minimal stimulation or —reveal quantal size (q) and release probability (p), typically yielding q values of 0.1-1 mV for AMPA-mediated EPSPs in cultured hippocampal neurons. These methods, applied in acute slices or , distinguish miniature PSPs (mPSPs) from evoked ones, providing insights into synaptic reliability without disrupting circuit activity.

References

  1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11117/
  2. https://openbooks.lib.msu.edu/introneuroscience1/chapter/postsynaptic-potentials/
  3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/postsynaptic-potential
  4. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1963/eccles/facts/
  5. https://nba.uth.tmc.edu/neuroscience/s1/chapter06.html
  6. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/inhibitory-postsynaptic-potential
  7. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3249630/
  8. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11993924/
  9. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0811017106
  10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK10855/
  11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6793380/
  12. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11309259/
  13. https://www.jneurosci.org/content/23/3/847
  14. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0896627394901554
  15. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK28270/
  16. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK5274/
  17. https://med.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Pharmacology_and_Neuroscience/Foundations_of_Neuroscience_%28Henley%29/02%253A_Neuronal_Communication/2.04%253A_Neurotransmitter_Action-_Ionotropic_Receptors
  18. https://www.jneurosci.org/content/16/20/6374
  19. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.11.06.686637v1
  20. https://www.jneurosci.org/content/17/1/58.short
  21. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2270066/
  22. https://www.jneurosci.org/content/19/8/2960
  23. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2075563/
  24. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26910/
  25. https://courses.cit.cornell.edu/bionb330/readings/neuron.pdf
  26. https://pressbooks.library.vcu.edu/psyc629/chapter/chapter-4-5/
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4865581/
  28. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11104/
  29. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/temporal-summation
  30. https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/advan.00051.2003
  31. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/synaptic-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnsyn.2019.00020/full
  32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627300810983
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7435362/
  34. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006349522000029
  35. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/computational-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fncom.2013.00056/full
  36. https://www.jneurosci.org/content/24/10/2345
  37. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3400125/
  38. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7203326/
  39. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2799885/
  40. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11106/
  41. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5841473/
  42. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/pharmacology-toxicology-and-pharmaceutical-science/neurotransmitter-transporters
  43. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557825/
  44. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1359647/
  45. https://www.jneurosci.org/content/25/11/2906.short
  46. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/847202v1.full
  47. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5992072/
  48. http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/ap.html
  49. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538143/
  50. https://pages.ucsd.edu/~jpineda/COGS107A/studyguide/module_06.htm
  51. https://academic.oup.com/book/9617/chapter/156682670
  52. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-022-02218-z
  53. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3602838/
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3167184/
  55. https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.89.10.4363
  56. https://elifesciences.org/articles/59619
  57. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-29491-2
  58. https://elifesciences.org/articles/71103
  59. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2015.00499/full
  60. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4852535/
  61. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867413008982
  62. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4117813/
  63. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-023-01345-7
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.