<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Grimes WN</submitter><funding>National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke</funding><funding>Intramural NIH HHS</funding><funding>NEI NIH HHS</funding><funding>National Eye Institute</funding><funding>Research to Prevent Blindness</funding><pagination>315-328.e4</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8792273</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>32(2)</volume><pubmed_abstract>The morphology of retinal neurons strongly influences their physiological function. Ganglion cell (GC) dendrites ramify in distinct strata of the inner plexiform layer (IPL) so that GCs responding to light increments (ON) or decrements (OFF) receive appropriate excitatory inputs. This vertical stratification prescribes response polarity and ensures consistent connectivity between cell types, whereas the lateral extent of GC dendritic arbors typically dictates receptive field (RF) size. Here, we identify circuitry in mouse retina that contradicts these conventions. AII amacrine cells are interneurons understood to mediate "crossover" inhibition by relaying excitatory input from the ON layer to inhibitory outputs in the OFF layer. Ultrastructural and physiological analyses show, however, that some AIIs deliver powerful inhibition to OFF GC somas and proximal dendrites in the ON layer, rendering the inhibitory RFs of these GCs smaller than their dendritic arbors. This OFF pathway, avoiding entirely the OFF region of the IPL, challenges several tenets of retinal circuitry. These results also indicate that subcellular synaptic organization can vary within a single population of neurons according to their proximity to potential postsynaptic targets.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Current biology : CB</journal><pubmed_title>Dendro-somatic synaptic inputs to ganglion cells contradict receptive field and connectivity conventions in the mammalian retina.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8792273</pmcid><funding_grant_id>EY028111</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 EY017836</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>Z01 NS003039</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>R01 EY028111</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>EY017836</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>NS003039</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Sedlacek M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Rieke F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Tian H</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Musgrove M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Diamond JS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Grimes WN</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Singer JH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hoon M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Nath A</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Dendro-somatic synaptic inputs to ganglion cells contradict receptive field and connectivity conventions in the mammalian retina.</name><description>The morphology of retinal neurons strongly influences their physiological function. Ganglion cell (GC) dendrites ramify in distinct strata of the inner plexiform layer (IPL) so that GCs responding to light increments (ON) or decrements (OFF) receive appropriate excitatory inputs. This vertical stratification prescribes response polarity and ensures consistent connectivity between cell types, whereas the lateral extent of GC dendritic arbors typically dictates receptive field (RF) size. Here, we identify circuitry in mouse retina that contradicts these conventions. AII amacrine cells are interneurons understood to mediate "crossover" inhibition by relaying excitatory input from the ON layer to inhibitory outputs in the OFF layer. Ultrastructural and physiological analyses show, however, that some AIIs deliver powerful inhibition to OFF GC somas and proximal dendrites in the ON layer, rendering the inhibitory RFs of these GCs smaller than their dendritic arbors. This OFF pathway, avoiding entirely the OFF region of the IPL, challenges several tenets of retinal circuitry. These results also indicate that subcellular synaptic organization can vary within a single population of neurons according to their proximity to potential postsynaptic targets.</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 Jan</publication><modification>2025-04-19T14:05:42.56Z</modification><creation>2025-04-19T14:05:42.56Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8792273</accession><cross_references><pubmed>34822767</pubmed><doi>10.1016/j.cub.2021.11.005</doi></cross_references></HashMap>