Cholinergic modulation of cortical function.

Extensive physiological research has demonstrated a number of common effects of acetylcholine within cortical structures, including the hippocampus, piriform cortex, and neocortex (Hasselmo, 1995, 1999). This article will provide a description of how the different physiological effects of acetylcholine could interact to alter specific functional properties of the cortex. The physiological effects of acetylcholine serve to enhance the influence of feed- forward afferent input to the cortex while decreasing background activity by suppressing excitatory feedback connections within cortical circuits. By enhancing the response to sensory input, high levels of acetylcholine enhance attention to sensory stimuli in the environment and enhance encoding of memory for specific stimuli. Interference from prior memory is reduced by suppressing synapses modified by prior learning (Sevilla et al., 2002; Linster et al., 2003).

Muscarinic suppression in stratum radiatum of CA1 shows dependence on presynaptic M1 receptors and is not dependent on effects at GABA(B) receptors.

Cholinergic modulation of synaptic transmission is vital to memory processes and may be responsible for setting network dynamics in the hippocampus appropriate for encoding of information. found evidence suggesting M1 receptors cause presynaptic inhibition of glutamatergic transmission, while research supports a role of the M2 receptor. We examined muscarinic inhibition of fEPSPs in stratum radiatum of mice lacking m1 subtype receptors (KO) compared to wild type (WT) controls. WT mice exhibit greater suppression of transmission by muscarine as compared to KO in a dose dependent fashion. Oxotremorine shows no significant difference in suppression between WT and KO, while MCN-A-343, an M1 agonist, exhibits a significant difference between KO and WT, with KO showing no suppression. One hundred micromolar SGS-742, a selective GABA(B) antagonist, fails to affect either normal transmission or muscarinic suppression in either WT or KO suggesting that differences in suppression between the groups is not attributable to differences in GABA(B) receptor activation due to muscarinic activation of GABAergic interneurons. These findings support a role for presynaptic m1 mAChRs in modulation of synaptic transmission in CA1, but indicate that other muscarinic receptor subtypes, such as M2, are also involved in suppression of synaptic potentials.