Our general understanding of neuronal function is that dendrites receive information that is transmitted to the axon, where action potentials (APs) are initiated and propagated to eventually trigger neurotransmitter release at synaptic terminals. Even though this canonical division of labor is true for a number of neuronal types in the mammalian brain (including neocortical and hippocampal pyramidal neurons or cerebellar Purkinje neurons), many neuronal types do not comply with this classical polarity scheme. In fact, dendrites can be the site of AP initiation and propagation, and even neurotransmitter release. In several interneuron types, all functions are carried out by dendrites as these neurons are devoid of a canonical axon. In this article, we present a few examples of “misbehaving” neurons (with a non-canonical polarity scheme) to highlight the diversity of solutions that are used by mammalian neurons to transmit information. Moreover, we discuss how the contribution of dendrites and axons to neuronal excitability may impose constraints on the morphology of these compartments in specific functional contexts.
The axon is responsible for integrating synaptic signals, generating action potentials (APs), propagating those APs to downstream synapses and converting them into patterns of neurotransmitter vesicle release. This process is mediated by a rich assortment of voltage-gated ion channels whose function can be affected on short and long time scales by activity. Moreover, neuromodulators control the activity of these proteins through G-protein coupled receptor signaling cascades. Here, we review cellular mechanisms and signaling pathways involved in axonal ion channel modulation and examine how changes to ion channel function affect AP initiation, AP propagation, and the release of neurotransmitter. We then examine how these mechanisms could modulate synaptic function by focusing on three key features of synaptic information transmission: synaptic strength, synaptic variability, and short-term plasticity. Viewing these cellular mechanisms of neuromodulation from a functional perspective may assist in extending these findings to theories of neural circuit function and its neuromodulation.
Currently, a scientific debate is ongoing about modeling nerve impulse propagation. One of the models discussed is the celebrated Hodgkin-Huxley model of the action potential, which is central to the electricity-centered conception of the nerve impulse that dominates contemporary neuroscience. However, this model cannot represent the nerve impulse completely, since it does not take into account non-electrical manifestations of the nerve impulse for which there is ample experimental evidence. As a result, alternative models of nerve impulse propagation have been proposed in contemporary (neuro)scientific literature. One of these models is the Heimburg-Jackson model, according to which the nerve impulse is an electromechanical density pulse in the neural membrane. This model is usually contrasted with the Hodgkin-Huxley model and is supposed to potentially be able to replace the latter. However, instead of contrasting these models of nerve impulse propagation, another approach integrates these models in a general unifying model. This general unifying model, the Engelbrecht model, is developed to unify all relevant manifestations of the nerve impulse and their interaction(s). Here, we want to contribute to the debate about modeling nerve impulse propagation by conceptually analyzing the Engelbrecht model. Combining the results of this conceptual analysis with insights from philosophy of science, we make recommendations for the study of nerve impulse propagation. The first conclusion of this analysis is that attempts to develop models that represent the nerve impulse accurately and completely appear unfeasible. Instead, models are and should be used as tools to study nerve impulse propagation for varying purposes, representing the nerve impulse accurately and completely enough to achieve the specified goals. The second conclusion is that integrating distinct models into a general unifying model that provides a consistent picture of nerve impulse propagation is impossible due to the distinct purposes for which they are developed and the conflicting assumptions these purposes often require. Instead of explaining nerve impulse propagation with a single general unifying model, it appears advisable to explain this complex phenomenon using a ‘mosaic’ framework of models in which each model provides a partial explanation of nerve impulse propagation.
Axons convey information in neuronal circuits via reliable conduction of action potentials (APs) from the axon initial segment (AIS) to the presynaptic terminals. Recent experimental findings increasingly evidence that the axonal function is not limited to the simple transmission of APs. Advances in subcellular-resolution recording techniques have shown that axons display activity-dependent modulation in spike shape and conduction velocity, which influence synaptic strength and latency. We briefly review here, how recent methodological developments facilitate the understanding of the axon physiology. We included the three most common methods, i.e., genetically encoded voltage imaging (GEVI), subcellular patch-clamp and high-density microelectrode arrays (HD-MEAs). We then describe the potential of using HD-MEAs in studying axonal physiology in more detail. Due to their robustness, amenability to high-throughput and high spatiotemporal resolution, HD-MEAs can provide a direct functional electrical readout of single cells and cellular ensembles at subcellular resolution. HD-MEAs can, therefore, be employed in investigating axonal pathologies, the effects of large-scale genomic interventions (e.g., with RNAi or CRISPR) or in compound screenings. A combination of extracellular microelectrode arrays (MEAs), intracellular microelectrodes and optical imaging may potentially reveal yet unexplored repertoires of axonal functions.