rabbit anti vglut1  (Proteintech)

Journal: Research

Article Title: A Corticotectal Pathway Regulates Vibrissal Somatosensory-Mediated Predatory Hunting Learning

doi: 10.34133/research.1295

Figure Lengend Snippet: Optogenetic activation of corticotectal pathway promoted hunting efficiency. (A) Schematic of viral injection of AAV-DIO-EGFP into S1BF used to monosynaptic anterograde tracing of S1BF neurons. (B) Micrographs illustrating the expression of EGFP + neurons in S1BF (top) and magnified area of S1BF projections to SC (bottom). (C) Schematic showing bilateral injection of AAV-DIO-ChR2-mCherry into the S1BF and implantation of optical fibers above the intermediate layers of SC to enable cell-type-specific manipulation of the S1BF–SC pathway in vGlut1 -IRES-Cre mice. (D) Representative coronal sections showing ChR2-mCherry expression in the S1BF (top) and the optical fiber tract positioned above ChR2-mCherry + axon terminals in the intermediate/deep layers of the SC (bottom). (E) Schematic diagram showing the whole-cell recording of light-evoked postsynaptic currents from neurons in the SC. (F) Representative traces and quantitative analyses showing the effects of antagonists of GABAa receptors (picrotoxin [PTX]) and glutamate receptors (D-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoate [D-AP5]/cyan-quixaline [CNQX]) on the amplitude of light-evoked postsynaptic currents (PSCs) recorded from neurons in the SC. (G) Example behavior ethogram of mice during optogenetic activation of S1BF–SC pathway. (H) Quantitative analyses of hunting efficiency (latency to attack, time to capture, and attack frequency) of mice during optogenetic activation of the vGlut1 + S1BF–SC pathway. Statistical analyses were conducted using 2-tailed Student t tests (* P < 0.05, * P < 0.01, n.s. > 0.05). Data are shown as mean ± SEM (error bars).

Article Snippet: The vGlut1 -IRES-Cre mice used in this study were acquired from the Jackson Laboratory (JAX Mice and Services).

Techniques: Activation Assay, Injection, Anterograde Tracing, Expressing

Journal: Research

Article Title: A Corticotectal Pathway Regulates Vibrissal Somatosensory-Mediated Predatory Hunting Learning

doi: 10.34133/research.1295

Figure Lengend Snippet: Inhibition of corticotectal pathway abrogated vibrissal somatosensory-mediated predatory hunting learning. (A) Schematic of the antidromic virus strategy used to map the neurons in specific layer V of S1BF projecting to SC in vGlut1 -IRES-Cre mice. (B) Representative micographs showing the SC projecting S1BF were dually labeled by Ctip2 and EGFP. (C) Diagram illustrating the viral approach employed to specifically inactivate the SC-projecting S1BF neurons in vGlut1 -IRES-Cre mice. (D) Micrograph of a coronal segment illustrating the expression of hM4Di-mCherry in S1BF (top) and CTB 488 (bottom) in SC. (E) Schematic of the behavioral paradigm of predatory hunting with inactivation of the S1BF–SC pathway in hunting training process (H4 to H10). (F and G) Representative trace of action potential firing (F) and quantitative analysis of the firing rate (G) showing the effectiveness of CNO for chemogenetically silencing hM4Di-expressing S1BF neurons in acute brain slices. (H) Example behavior ethogram of mice with inactivation of the S1BF–SC pathway in hunting D1 to D4. (I) Quantitative analyses of hunting efficiency (latency to attack, time to capture, and attack frequency) in mice with S1BF–SC pathway inactivation during hunting training. Statistical analyses were conducted using 2-tailed Student t tests (* P < 0.05, *** P < 0.001, n.s. > 0.05). Data are shown as mean ± SEM (error bars).

Article Snippet: The vGlut1 -IRES-Cre mice used in this study were acquired from the Jackson Laboratory (JAX Mice and Services).

Techniques: Inhibition, Virus, Labeling, Expressing

Journal: Research

Article Title: A Corticotectal Pathway Regulates Vibrissal Somatosensory-Mediated Predatory Hunting Learning

doi: 10.34133/research.1295

Figure Lengend Snippet: Hunting learning promoted excitatory synaptic transmission in the vGlut1 + S1BF–SC pathway. (A) Schematic diagram illustrating the strategy ChR2 injection. (B) Representative coronal sections showing ChR2-mCherry expression in the S1BF (left) and the optical fiber tract positioned above ChR2-mCherry + axon terminals in the intermediate/deep layers of the SC (right). (C) Example traces of EPSCs and IPSCs recorded from naïve and well-trained mice. (D to F) Quantitative analyses of EPSCs, IPSCs, and E/I ratio in naïve and well-trained mice. (G) Example trace of AMPAR-mediated currents and NMDAR-mediated currents recorded from naïve and well-trained mice. (H to J) Quantitative analyses of AMPAR-mediated currents, NMDAR-mediated currents, and AMPAR/NMDAR ratio in naïve and well-trained mice. Numbers of neurons, slices, and mice were indicated from bottom to top in graphs in sequence. (K) Representative confocal stack images showing dendritic spine density in the SC of naïve and well-trained mice. (L) Summary of dendritic spine density in the SC of naïve and well-trained mice. (M) Summary of the density of stubby-, mushroom-, long/thin-, and filopodia-shaped spines in the SC of mice from the above 2 groups. Statistical analyses were conducted using 2-tailed Student t tests (* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001, n.s. > 0.05). Data are shown as mean ± SEM (error bars).

Article Snippet: The vGlut1 -IRES-Cre mice used in this study were acquired from the Jackson Laboratory (JAX Mice and Services).

Techniques: Transmission Assay, Injection, Expressing, Sequencing

Journal: iScience

Article Title: Response dynamics of discrete subiculum→retrosplenial cortex projections underlying trace fear conditioning

doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2026.115317

Figure Lengend Snippet: VGluT2 + SUB→RSP afferents are specifically required for processing a temporal trace separating a cue and a shock (A, D, and G) Experimental design of behavioral tasks. Diagrams depict virus infusion sites in DH and cannula placements for CNO injections in RSP (top and right), and viral expression in RSP and DH (bottom and right). (B) When compared to vehicle, CNO injections 30 min before TFC training, impaired freezing at test in response to both the tone and trace periods in mice receiving AAV-hM4D (Gi) ( n = 9–10; two-way ANOVA with repeated measures; factor: treatment, p = 0.0098, F (1, 17) = 8.444, factor: phase, p < 0.0001, F (2, 34) = 67.41, factor: trial × phase, p = 0.0084, F (2, 34) = 5.522). (C) CNO injection before training in delay fear conditioning (DFC) did not affect freezing to tone or post-tone when compared to vehicle-injected mice ( n = 9–10; two-way ANOVA with repeated measures; factor: treatment, p = 0.6738, F (1, 17) = 0.1835, factor: phase, p < 0.0001, F (2, 34) = 97.84, factor: trial × phase, p = 0.1764, F (2, 34) = 1.827). (E) In VGluT2-Cre mice, CNO injection 30 min before training significantly impaired freezing during the trace but not tone compared to vehicle group ( n = 10; two-way ANOVA with repeated measures; factor: treatment, p = 0.0132, F (1, 18) = 7.565, factor: phase, p < 0.0001, F (2, 36) = 41.47, factor: trial × phase, p = 0.0001, F (2, 36) = 12.00. (F) In VGluT1-Cre mice, terminal silencing with CNO did not affect freezing compared to vehicle controls ( n = 9; two-way ANOVA with repeated measures; factor: treatment, p = 0.0931, F (1, 16) = 3.189, factor: phase, p < 0.0001, F (2, 32) = 13.78, factor: trial × phase, p = 0.9968, F (2, 32) = 0.003253) when compared to vehicle controls. (H) Injections of CNO ( n = 10) before trace-light conditioning (TLC) training did not affect freezing during either the tone or light periods in mice expressing inhibitory DREADD only in VGluT2 + SUB→RSP projections ( n = 10; two-way ANOVA with repeated measures; factor: treatment, p = 0.2577, F (1, 18) = 1.366, factor: phase, p < 0.0001, F (2, 36) = 52.27, factor: trial × phase, p = 0.5714, F (2, 36) = 0.5685). (I) Injections of CNO before TLC training significantly impaired freezing to both tone and light when compared to vehicle in mice expressing inhibitory DREADD in all SUB→RSP projections compared to vehicle injected group ( n = 5–6; two-way ANOVA with repeated measures; factor: treatment, p = 0.0087, F (1, 9) = 11.12, factor: phase, p < 0.0001, F (2, 18) = 19.01, factor: trial × phase, p = 0.3846, F (2, 18) = 1.008. Data presented as mean ± SEM ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001; NS, not significant; WT, wild-type. All scale bars, 250 μm.

Article Snippet: Vglut1-Cre mice , Jackson Laboratory (Harris JA et al., 2014) , Cat#037512; RRID:IMSR_JAX:037512.

Techniques: Virus, Expressing, Injection

Journal: iScience

Article Title: Response dynamics of discrete subiculum→retrosplenial cortex projections underlying trace fear conditioning

doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2026.115317

Figure Lengend Snippet: Characterization of VGluT1 + and VGluT2 + neurons in the SUB→RSP circuit (A) Schematic of Cre-Switch viral vector (pAAV-Ef1a-DO_DIO-TdTomato_EGFP-WPRE). TdTomato is expressed in Cre-negative cells, while in Cre-positive cells, Cre recombination inverts and excises the TdTomato cassette, leading to EGFP expression. (B) Cre + (VGluT2 + , green) and Cre − (red, presumably VGluT1 + ) hippocampal neurons visualized after injection of the Cre-dependent color flipping nuclear reporter (pAAV8-EF1a-Nuc-flox(mCherry)-EGFP) into the DH. (C) Retrograde Cre-dependent “color flipping” reporter (pAAV-Ef1a-DO_DIO-TdTomato_EGFP-WPRE) was injected into RSP of VGluT1-Cre or VGluT2-Cre mice. Red and green signals in the SUB show that both VGluT1 + and VGluT2 + population are projecting to the RSP. (D) Retrograde Cre-dependent “color flipping” reporter was injected into SUB of VGluT1-Cre or VGluT2-Cre mice. Green and red signals in DH and SUB indicate presence of both VGluT1 and VGluT2 populations of neurons in both areas as well as presence of VGluT1 + and VGluT2 + CA1→SUB projections. (E) Left, schematic of proximity biotinylation assay. Right, injection sites for preBirA∗ in DH and corresponding GFP signal in DH and RSP. (F) Right, cytoBirA ∗ was injected into DH of naive VGluT1-Cre and VGluT2-Cre mice, biotinylated proteins were pulled down, and quantified from RSP. Left and up, KEGG terms of differentially expressed proteins in VGluT1 + or VGluT2 + biotinylated terminals. Bottom and left, after injection of the virus expressing preBirA ∗ , the levels of biotinylated proteins from VGluT1 RSC were dissimilar, as indicated by lack of correlation, suggesting differences in their presynaptic proteomes. (G) Main cell populations identified using known neuronal and non-neuronal cell markers. (H) VGluT1 and VGluT2 expression across cell types reveals largely non-overlapping populations. All scale bars, 250 μm.

Article Snippet: Vglut1-Cre mice , Jackson Laboratory (Harris JA et al., 2014) , Cat#037512; RRID:IMSR_JAX:037512.

Techniques: Plasmid Preparation, Expressing, Injection, Cell Surface Biotinylation Assay, Virus