Skip to main content
Browse Subject Areas

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Dopamine acting at D1-like, D2-like and α1-adrenergic receptors differentially modulates theta and gamma oscillatory activity in primary motor cortex

  • Mazhar Özkan,

    Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliations Aston Brain Centre, Aston University, School of Life and Health Sciences, Birmingham, United Kingdom, Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Nicholas W. Johnson,

    Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Aston Brain Centre, Aston University, School of Life and Health Sciences, Birmingham, United Kingdom

  • Umit S. Sehirli,

    Roles Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Gavin L. Woodhall,

    Roles Conceptualization, Project administration, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Aston Brain Centre, Aston University, School of Life and Health Sciences, Birmingham, United Kingdom

  • Ian M. Stanford

    Roles Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Aston Brain Centre, Aston University, School of Life and Health Sciences, Birmingham, United Kingdom


The loss of dopamine (DA) in Parkinson’s is accompanied by the emergence of exaggerated theta and beta frequency neuronal oscillatory activity in the primary motor cortex (M1) and basal ganglia. DA replacement therapy or deep brain stimulation reduces the power of these oscillations and this is coincident with an improvement in motor performance implying a causal relationship. Here we provide in vitro evidence for the differential modulation of theta and gamma activity in M1 by DA acting at receptors exhibiting conventional and non-conventional DA pharmacology. Recording local field potentials in deep layer V of rat M1, co-application of carbachol (CCh, 5 μM) and kainic acid (KA, 150 nM) elicited simultaneous oscillations at a frequency of 6.49 ± 0.18 Hz (theta, n = 84) and 34.97 ± 0.39 Hz (gamma, n = 84). Bath application of DA resulted in a decrease in gamma power with no change in theta power. However, application of either the D1-like receptor agonist SKF38393 or the D2-like agonist quinpirole increased the power of both theta and gamma suggesting that the DA-mediated inhibition of oscillatory power is by action at other sites other than classical DA receptors. Application of amphetamine, which promotes endogenous amine neurotransmitter release, or the adrenergic α1-selective agonist phenylephrine mimicked the action of DA and reduced gamma power, a result unaffected by prior co-application of D1 and D2 receptor antagonists SCH23390 and sulpiride. Finally, application of the α1-adrenergic receptor antagonist prazosin blocked the action of DA on gamma power suggestive of interaction between α1 and DA receptors. These results show that DA mediates complex actions acting at dopamine D1-like and D2-like receptors, α1 adrenergic receptors and possibly DA/α1 heteromultimeric receptors to differentially modulate theta and gamma activity in M1.


In Parkinson’s, the loss of dopamine (DA) is characterised by the emergence of high-amplitude oscillations that predominate at theta (4–8 Hz) and beta frequency (15–35 Hz) [1,2,3,4]. This increase in beta oscillatory power, in cortex and nuclei of the basal ganglia, is thought to limit computational capacity [5] through reduced information coding and consequent inability to uncouple and re-recruit appropriate motor networks. Administration of levodopa [6,7] or deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus [8,9] reduces beta power, which is accompanied by improvement in motor performance.

Recent evidence has implicated the primary motor cortex (M1) as a potential target both for pharmacological and surgical interventions in Parkinson’s. Stimulation of M1 appears to normalise firing rate of neurons in the subthalamic nucleus producing immediate improvements in tremor, rigidity, as well as long-term improvements in bradykinesia and akinesia [10,11], while repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of M1 improves motor performance in Parkinson’s [12,13,14,15]. In addition, antidromic stimulation of deep layer motor cortical pyramidal cells [16] and recent advances using optogenetic approaches have shown that afferent axons projecting from deep layers of M1 may be the primary target in effective deep brain stimulation [17].

For a number of years we have investigated network oscillatory activity in brain slices recording from M1 [18,19,20,21,22] and observed that oscillatory activity can be routinely induced by co-application of the muscarinic receptor agonist carbachol (CCh) and the glutamate receptor agonist kainic acid (KA). Beta and gamma oscillations in M1 are abolished by picrotoxin and modulated by gabazine, tiagabine and zolpidem, indicating dependence on networks of fast spiking (FS) GABAergic interneurons [18,21,22]. As with gamma (35–80 Hz) oscillations in the hippocampus [23,24] beta oscillatory activity in M1 is generated as a consequence of sustained excitation of networks of inhibitory interneurons [18,20] which are able to entrain each other to fire in a synchronous manner and hence sculpt pyramidal cell activity through repetitive (Iphasic) inhibitory discharges, the frequency of which is dependent upon the kinetics of the inhibitory postsynaptic potentials [23,25,26].

DA projections preferentially innervate deep layers V and VI of the M1 and prefrontal cortex [27,28,29,30,31] and particularly the parvalbumin-positive FS interneurons therein [32,33]. Furthermore, both D1 and D2 receptors have been observed in deep layers [34] with D1 receptor immunoreactivity being prevalent on parvalbumin-positive interneurons [35,36,37]. Therefore, as FS cells are rhythmogenic governors of projection neurons, it might be expected that DA would have a profound effect on the oscillatory activity in M1.

Using an improved brain slice preparation based on a protocol utilising a number of neuro-protectant agents, we have previously reported simultaneous persistent theta and gamma oscillations in M1, which appear mechanistically distinct [22]. In this study we show differential modulation of theta and gamma oscillations by DA acting at both D1 and D2-like receptors, α1 adrenergic receptors and possibly DA/ α1 heteromultimeric receptor complexes.

Materials and methods

In vitro slice preparation

All animal procedures were performed in accordance with the Aston University policy on research involving animals and under a project license approved by the Aston University Bioethics Committee. Procedures were also in accordance with the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act UK 1986 as amended by the European Communities Directive 2010/63/EU. Sagittal brain slices (450 μm thick) containing M1 were prepared from male Wistar rats (50–100 g). Animals were first anaesthetised using isoflurane (4% in O2) until no heartbeat was detected and then transcardially perfused with ice-cold sucrose-based artificial cerebral spinal fluid (aCSF) containing (in mM): 180 sucrose, KCl 2.5, MgSO4 10, NaH2PO4 1.25, NaHCO3 25, glucose 10, CaCl2 0.5, ascorbic acid 1, N-acetyl cysteine 2, taurine 1, ethyl pyruvate 20 and saturated with 95% O2 and 5% CO2 at pH 7.3, 300–310 mOsm. Indomethacin (45 μM), aminoguanidine (200 μM) and uric acid (400 μM) were added to improve slice viability [22]. The brain was quickly removed and placed into the same sucrose-based aCSF. Using a HM-650V Microslicer (Microm GMBH, Germany) sagittal slices were cut at room temperature. Slices were then transferred to an interface holding chamber at room temperature containing oxygenated standard aCSF containing (in mM): NaCl 126, KCl 3, MgSO4 1.6, NaH2PO4 1.25, NaHCO3 26, glucose 10, CaCl2 2, with an osmolarity between 300–310 mOsm, where they were left for at least 1 hour.

Extracellular recordings

Slices were transferred to an interface recording chamber (Scientific System Design Inc., Canada) at 32–34°C and continually perfused at 1–2 ml/min with standard aCSF. Local field potential (LFP) recordings in deep layer V of M1 were made using borosilicate glass microelectrodes pulled on a Flaming-Brown micropipette puller (P-1000; Sutter Instrument Co., USA) filled with standard aCSF (resistance of 1–3 MΩ). Signals were amplified 1000-fold using an EXT10-2F amplifier and an LHBF-48X filter (NPI Electronics GMBH, Germany), band-pass filtered at 0.5 Hz and 700 Hz. Low amplitude 50 Hz signal interference was removed using a HumBug (Quest Scientific, North Vancouver, Canada). Signals were digitized and recorded at 10 kHz using a CED Micro-1401 mkII digitizer and Spike2 software (Cambridge Electronic Design, UK) and saved to disk.

Drug application

Oscillatory activity was induced by bath application of CCh (5 μM) and KA (150 nM) and left to stabilise for at least 60 min prior to recording. Drugs were bath applied in known concentrations having been previously prepared in stock solutions of 1–50 mM and stored at -20°C. The drugs used were carbamoylcholine chloride (carbachol), DA and amphetamine (Sigma Ltd., Gillingham, UK), kainic acid (Abcam, Cambridge, UK), SKF38393, SCH23390, quinpirole, sulpiride, prazosin, phenylephrine (Tocris Bioscience, Bristol, UK). All drugs were applied for a minimum of 40 min before data were sampled.

DA is readily oxidised (observed with notable colour change) which will alter the effective concentration and potentially produce unreliable results. DA oxidation may also result in the production of reactive oxygen species and free radicals which may have a detrimental effect on slice viability. We found that the addition of the anti-oxidant ascorbic acid [38,39] the aCSF prior to DA application, successfully prevented the oxidation of DA for the duration of our experiments. Baseline recordings for all experiments were therefore recorded in the presence of ascorbic acid (500 μM).

Data analysis

Data were analysed off-line using Spike2 (CED, UK). Raw data presented were filtered using IIR digital filtering by Bessel band pass between 3–10 Hz for theta oscillations and 30–45 Hz for gamma oscillations. Changes to power values were derived from power spectra generated with Fourier analysis of 40 s epochs of data from control and drug-applied conditions. Unless otherwise stated, pooled data are represented as mean peak power values normalised to control ± SEM. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used for analysis of paired data sets while the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Dunn's multiple comparisons test was used for the analysis of experiments using multiple doses of the same drug. All tests were performed using GraphPad Prism version 5.00 for Windows (GraphPad Software, San Diego California USA). Significance expressed as *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001. Significant changes in power are given in Table 1 with changes denoted by arrows (up represents an increase in power and a down arrow, a decrease power. The number of arrows corresponds to significance at 1, 2 or 3*).

Table 1. A summary of the drug induced changes in theta and gamma power.


Previously, CCh and KA at 50 μM and 400 nM respectively were used to generate beta oscillations in M1 [18]. Here, we have applied KA and CCh at lower concentrations and observed the emergence of multiple rhythms (Fig 1A and 1B). These differences presumably reflect the addition of neuro-protectants which improved slice viability and enhanced preservation of the GABA interneurons required for rhythmogenesis. Therefore, recording in deep layer V of M1, application of CCh (5 μM) and KA (150 nM) generated simultaneous rhythms at theta frequency (6.49 ± 0.18 Hz, n = 84, Fig 1Ci) and gamma frequency (34.97 ± 0.39 Hz, n = 84, Fig 1Cii).

Fig 1. Simultaneous theta and gamma oscillations in M1.

(A) Extracellular in vitro recording from deep layer V of M1 in the presence of CCh (5 μM) and KA (150 nM) which has been low-pass filtered at 60 Hz. (B) Representative power-spectrum demonstrating emergence of theta and gamma frequency oscillatory activity (C) The same data after band-pass filtering showing (i) theta (3–10 Hz) and (ii) gamma (30–45 Hz) oscillations.

Exogenous application of DA (30 μM) was without effect on theta oscillatory power (112.4 ± 14.6%, n = 8, ns Fig 2Ai, iii, iv) but significantly reduced gamma oscillations (83.9 ± 4.9%, n = 8, p<0.05, Fig 2Aii, iii, iv). In subsequent experiments, we applied the D1-like receptor agonist SKF38393 (SKF; 10 μM) or the D2-like receptor agonist quinpirole (10 μM). Application of SKF resulted in the significant increase in the power of both theta (162 ± 17.9%, n = 25, p<0.001, Fig 2Bi, iii, iv) and gamma (160 ± 12.4%, n = 25, p<0.001, Fig 2Bii, iii, iv) oscillations. Likewise, application of quinpirole significantly increased the power of both theta (to 149.0 ± 13.8%, n = 9, p<0.01, Fig 2Ci, iii, iv) and gamma oscillations (to 133.9 ± 12.3%, n = 9, p<0.05, Fig 2Cii, iii, iv).

Fig 2. DA reduces gamma power while DA receptor agonists increase both theta and gamma power.

(A) Band-passed raw data of (i) theta and (ii) gamma oscillations after induction with CCh and KA (ctrl) and upon application of dopamine (30 μM). (iii) Typical power spectra before (solid line) and after application of dopamine (dashed line). (iv) Peak power changes of theta (grey bars) and gamma (red bars) oscillations normalised to control. (B) Band-passed raw data of (i) theta and (ii) gamma oscillations after induction with CCh and KA (ctrl) and after application of SKF 38393 (SKF, 10 μM). (iii) Typical power spectra demonstrating peak responses before (solid line) and after application of SKF (dashed line). (iv) Peak power changes of theta (grey bars) and gamma (red bars) oscillations normalised to control. (C) Band-passed raw data of (i) theta and (ii) gamma oscillations after induction with CCh and KA (ctrl) and after application of quinpirole (10 μM). (iii) Typical power spectra demonstrating peak responses before (solid line) and after application of quinpirole (dashed line). (iv) Peak power changes of theta (grey bars) and gamma (red bars) oscillations normalised to control. * p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***, p<0.001.

In order to avoid exogenous application of DA which is prone to oxidation even in the presence of ascorbic acid, we applied amphetamine to promote endogenous release of DA [see 40 for review]. However, it should be noted that amphetamine may also release noradrenaline, 5-HT and acetylcholine as well as DA [40,41,42]. Bath application of amphetamine (20 μM) increased theta power (151 ± 16.2%, n = 13, p<0.001 Fig 3Ai, 3B and 3C) and decreased gamma power (67 ± 7.8%, n = 13, p<0.001 Fig 3Aii, 3B and 3C).

Fig 3. Amphetamine increases theta power while reducing gamma power.

(A) Band-passed raw data of (i) theta and (ii) gamma oscillations after induction with CCh and KA (ctrl) and upon application of amphetamine (20 μM). (B) Typical power spectra before (solid line) and after application of amphetamine (dashed line). (C) Peak power changes of theta (grey bars) and gamma (red bars) oscillations normalised to control. ***, p<0.001.

These data showed that application of DA receptor agonists had different effects to those of exogenous or endogenous DA. As recent evidence has suggested that DA may also act on adrenergic receptors [43,44], we decided to pharmacologically assess the role of α1-adrenergic receptors. Application of the α1-adrenergic receptor agonist phenylephrine (10 μM) had no effect on theta power (106 ± 7.8%, n = 9, ns, Fig 4Ai, iii, iv) but significantly reduced gamma power (69 ± 5.2%, n = 9, p<0.01, Fig 4Aii, iii, iv). Hence, it is possible that DA acts through α1-adrenergic receptors. We repeated the application of phenylephrine in the presence of a combination of D1 receptor antagonist SCH23390 (SCH, 2 μM) and the D2 receptor antagonist sulpiride (10 μM). Under these conditions phenylephrine, induced a significant reduction in theta power (to 74.2 ± 11% of control, p<0.01 vs SCH + sulpiride, n = 7, 4Bi, iii, iv) and a significant reduction in gamma power (to 40.5 ± 7% of control, p<0.01 vs SCH + sulpiride, n = 7, Fig 4Bii, iii, iv). Therefore, phenylephrine alone resulted in a decrease in gamma power whereas together with SCH and sulpiride it resulted in decrease in both theta and gamma power. Overall, these data suggested α1-adrenergic receptor activation was sufficient to decrease oscillatory power, however, they did not provide evidence that DA acts at α1-adrenergic receptors.

Fig 4. DA action is mimicked by the α1 adrenergic receptor agonist phenylephrine.

(A) Band-passed raw data of (i) theta and (ii) gamma oscillations after induction with CCh and KA (ctrl) and after application of phenylephrine (10 μM) (iii) Typical power spectra demonstrating peak responses before (solid line) and after application of phenylephrine (dashed line). (iv) Peak power changes of theta (grey bars) and gamma (red bars) oscillations normalised to control. (B) Band-passed raw data of (i) theta and (ii) gamma oscillations after induction with CCh and KA (ctrl) and after application of sulpiride (10 μM) and SCH (2 μM) and then addition of phenylephrine (10 μM). (iii) Typical power spectra demonstrating peak responses before (solid line) and after application of sulpiride and SCH (dashed line) and then upon addition of phenylephrine (dotted line). (iv) Peak power changes of theta (grey bars) and gamma (red bars) oscillations normalised to control **p<0.01, *** p<0.001.

In order to address this possibility, we applied DA in the presence of DA receptor antagonists and then in the presence of the α1 receptor antagonist prazosin. As predicted, application SCH and sulpiride blocked the DA-mediated inhibition of gamma power (theta; 138.6 ± 21.1% of control, ns, n = 6 5Ai, iii, iv) and (gamma; 104.1 ± 21% of control, ns, n = 6, 5Aii, iii, iv). Application of the α1-adrenergic receptor antagonist prazosin (10 μM) increased theta power (157 ± 12.6%, n = 10, p<0.01, Fig 5Bi, iii, iv) but was without effect on gamma power (103 ± 11.7%, n = 10, ns, Fig 5Bii, iii, iv). Subsequent application of DA further increased theta power (to 263.5 ± 49.8% of control, p<0.01 vs prazosin alone, n = 10, Fig 5Bi, iii, iv) but DA was now without effect on gamma power (91 ± 19.4% of control, n = 10, ns, Fig 5Bii, iii, iv).

Fig 5. The action of DA is blocked by both DA receptor and α1 adrenergic receptor antagonists.

(A) Band-passed raw data of (i) theta and (ii) gamma oscillations after induction with CCh and KA (ctrl) and after application of sulpiride (10 μM) and SCH 23390 (SCH, 2 μM) and then addition of dopamine (30 μM). iii) Typical power spectra demonstrating peak responses before (solid line) and after application of sulpiride and SCH (dashed line) and then dopamine (dotted line). (iv) Peak power changes of theta (grey bars) and gamma (red bars) oscillations normalised to control. (B) Band-passed raw data of (i) theta and (ii) gamma oscillations after induction with CCh and KA (ctrl) and after application of prazosin (10 μM) and then dopamine (30 μM). (iii) Typical power spectra demonstrating peak responses before (solid line) and after application of prazosin (dashed line) and dopamine (dotted line). (iv) Peak power changes of theta (grey bars) and gamma (red bars) oscillations normalised to control **p<0.01.


In this study we have shown that simultaneous theta (2–8 Hz) and gamma (30–45 Hz) oscillations can be elicited in layer V of M1 in vitro and that these oscillations are differentially modulated by DA. Application of DA was without effect on theta oscillatory power but resulted in a significant decrease in gamma oscillatory power. The effect on gamma was mimicked by application of amphetamine and by α1 adrenergic receptor activation but not by selective DA receptor activation. Following antagonism of DA receptors, subsequent α1 adrenoreceptor activation still produced a decrease in gamma power, while following antagonism of α1 adrenergic receptors, DA increased theta power but no increase in gamma power was observed. These results indicate that DA acting at DA and α1 receptors differentially modulates the power of theta and gamma oscillations. The block of DA-mediated effects on gamma power by the α1 adrenergic receptor antagonist prazosin raises the possibility of DA action at α1-adrenergic and/or DA/α1 heteromultimeric receptor complexes.

Simultaneous theta and gamma oscillations in vitro

Previous research in our laboratory investigated beta oscillations, produced in M1 using 400 nM KA and 50 μM CCh [18]. Since then a modified sucrose-based aCSF has been developed, which incorporated neuroprotectants (to prevent excitotoxicity and cell death) and anti-oxidants (to prevent damage from reactive oxygen species and free radicals), such as indomethacin, uric acid, ascorbic acid, N-acetyl cysteine, taurine and amino-guanidine. Use of this modified aCSF has enabled reduced concentrations of KA (100 nM) and CCh (10 μM) to be used to elicit oscillatory activity at in M1.

Simultaneous oscillations, at theta (6.6 Hz) and gamma (36.6 Hz) which show greatest power in layer V and display significant phase-amplitude coupling have been previously described in our refined in vitro preparation [22]. Furthermore, the results of our pharmacological studies are consistent with theta oscillations being generated as a result of synchronous intrinsic membrane potential activity [45,46,47,48,49], while the generation of gamma oscillations require AMPA mediated EPSP/Cs indicating a mechanistic resemblance to the pyramidal-interneuron gamma (PING) model of oscillation generation which depends upon mutually connected excitatory pyramidal cells and inhibitory interneurons [50,51,52]. Using magnetoencephalography in healthy participants we have also previously reported in M1, two similar rhythms at ~10 Hz and 15–30 Hz [19]. The faster rhythm also appears sensitive to GABAA receptor ligands, supporting the view that their generation is comparable between modalities.

DA receptors and oscillations

With regard to theta activity, application of DA appears to have little effect on oscillatory power. Early studies showed that theta activity was unaffected by the loss of DA [53] and DA had no effect on hippocampal intrinsic membrane potentials which oscillated at theta frequency [54]. Furthermore, in vivo studies in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus indicated that dopaminergic modulation yielded no change in theta power although coherence between the two areas was increased [55], indicating that information sharing between brain regions can be altered regardless of changes in oscillatory power.

In contrast to the lack of action on theta oscillations, bath application of DA produced a moderate but significant decrease in gamma oscillatory power consistent with reports of DA suppressing gamma oscillations in the hippocampus [54,56]. Previously, D1 receptor activation has been shown to increase the excitability of both pyramidal cells and interneurons [57,58], while D2 receptor activation appears to reduce excitability [59]. Similarly, activation of D1-like and D2-like receptors in striatum had opposing effects on GABA release [60]. This led us to speculate that differential effects of applied D1-like and D2-like receptor agonists on oscillatory activity would be observed. However, this was not the case and both D1-like receptor activation with SKF38393 and D2-like receptor activation with quinpirole increased the power of both theta and gamma activity.

The increase in gamma power upon application of SKF was expected as the classical view of D1 receptor activation is to promote network excitability by the direct modulation of voltage-dependent and ligand gated ion channels inducing postsynaptic depolarisation of pyramidal cells and interneurons. D1 receptors positively couple to adenylyl cyclase (AC), elevating levels of cAMP and activating protein kinase A which affects multiple downstream targets which include voltage-dependent Na+ channels [57, 61], the activation of L-type Ca2+ channels [62,63] and attenuation of a slowly inactivating outward rectifying K+ current [57,64].

In contrast, the increased gamma power observed upon application of the D2 agonist quinpirole was unexpected as D2 receptors negatively couple to AC and have been shown to mediate decreases in excitability of PFC layer V pyramidal cells [65]. While it is recognised that decrease in network excitability may lead to changes in firing rate and pattern of firing that could potentially increase network synchrony, enhanced cellular excitability mediated by D2 receptors is not unprecedented. In layer V neurons of PFC, quinpirole has been shown to enhance an afterdepolarisation mediated by L-type calcium channels [66]. Furthermore and specifically in M1 in vivo, quinpirole has been shown to increase firing rate [31] while D2 antagonists produce transient reduction in excitability [67]. Further experiments at single-cell level are required to address the possibility that D2-like receptors have an excitatory role in M1.

α1 receptors and oscillations

Amphetamine was initially applied to promote endogenous release and avoid the problems associated with oxidation of bath-applied DA. However, amphetamine has also been shown to release noradrenaline, 5-HT and acetylcholine as well as DA [40,41,42]. Therefore, we cannot be certain that the effects observed are solely due to action of DA on DA receptors. Indeed, DA action at α1 adrenergic receptors was subsequently confirmed as the selective α1 adrenergic receptor agonist phenylephrine decreased gamma power while the α1 adrenergic receptor antagonist prazosin blocked the effect of DA.

Previous in vitro studies have reported a decrease in CCh and KA induced gamma power by noradrenaline in CA3 [56], while specific activation of α1 adrenergic receptors reduced gamma power [68]. In addition, in vivo, activation of locus coeruleus (LC) reduced EEG in 20–44 Hz range [69] and a decrease gamma activity in the dentate gyrus [70,71]. Interestingly, while activation of LC reduces gamma it enhances theta frequencies [69]. In M1, this effect was observed upon application of amphetamine but not on activation of α1 adrenergic receptors with phenylephrine.

α1 adrenergic receptor activation may lead to the suppression of excitability through a direct hyperpolarisation of pyramidal cells [68,72,73] and/or a decrease in EPSP amplitude, for example, through presynaptic effects [74]. Similarly, adrenoceptors may mediate a decrease in excitation of interneurons [68,75,76] which would lead to reduced gamma power.

Promiscuous action of DA and α1 receptors

There is a long literature of promiscuous interaction between DA and adrenergic receptors, particularly α1 [43,77,78]. A recent study by Yang et al., (2014) [79] found that a DA-induced membrane hyperpolarisation was mediated by adrenergic receptors, while DA acting at adrenergic receptors on interneurons of the entorhinal cortex produces membrane depolarisation through the inhibition of an inward rectifier K+ channels resulting in secondary activation of T-type calcium channels which augments the frequency of sIPSP and mIPSPs [44].

In prefrontal cortex, D1 receptors and adrenergic receptors appear to co-localise in dendrites of neurons [80] which may suggest interaction between these two receptors at the level of G-protein or second messsenger systems. Furthermore, DA/α1 subunits potentially form heteromultimeric receptor complexes which could display unique signalling and activation properties [81,82,83,84]. The robust effects of DA acting through α1 receptors in M1 is surprising considering DA has only 1/50th the affinity of noradrenaline for the α1 receptor [85]. It may be that DA has a greater affinity for a DA/α1 heteromultimeric receptor than for homomeric α1 receptors.

In summary, we have shown that M1 can generate co-existent theta and gamma oscillations which are differentially modulated by DA acting at DA and alpha-1 receptors.


Mazhar Ozkan was supported by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) and Marmara University Scientific Research Committee (SAG-C-DRP-080415-0102). Nicholas Johnson was a BBSRC CASE student (with Lily U.K.). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.


  1. 1. Levy R., Hutchison WD, Lozano AM and Dostrovsky JO. High-frequency synchronization of neuronal activity in the subthalamic nucleus of parkinsonian patients with limb tremor. J Neurosci 2000; 20: 7766–7775. pmid:11027240
  2. 2. Mallet N, Pogosyan A, Marton LF, Bolam JP, Brown P, Magill PJ. Parkinsonian beta oscillations in the external globus pallidus and their relationship with subthalamic nucleus activity. J Neurosci 2008; 28(52): 14245–14258. pmid:19109506
  3. 3. Pollok B, Krause V, Martsch W, Wach C, Schnitzler A, Sudmeyer M. Motor-cortical oscillations in early stages of Parkinson's disease. J Physiol 2012; 532 590: 3203–3212.
  4. 4. Hall SD, Prokic EJ, McAllister CJ, Ronnqvist KC, Williams AC, Yamawaki N, Witton C, Woodhall GL, Stanford IM. GABA-mediated changes in inter-hemispheric beta frequency activity in early-stage Parkinson's disease. Neuroscience 2014; 281: 68–76. pmid:25261686
  5. 5. Hammond C, Bergman H, Brown P. Pathological synchronization in Parkinson's disease: networks, models and treatments. Trends Neurosci 2007; 30(7): 357–364. pmid:17532060
  6. 6. Brown P, Oliviero A, Mazzone P, Insola A, Tonali P, Di Lazzaro V. Dopamine dependency of oscillations between subthalamic nucleus and pallidum in Parkinson's disease. J Neurosci 2001; 21: 1033–1038. pmid:11157088
  7. 7. Kuhn AA, Kupsch A, Schneider GH, Brown P. Reduction in subthalamic 8–35 Hz oscillatory activity correlates with clinical improvement in Parkinson's disease. E J Neurosci 2006; 23:1956–1960.
  8. 8. Bergman H, Wichmann T, Karmon B, DeLong MR. The primate subthalamic nucleus. II. Neuronal activity in the MPTP model of parkinsonism. J Neurophysiol 1994; 72: 507–520. pmid:7983515
  9. 9. Eusebio A, Thevathasan W, Doyle Gaynor L, Pogosyan A, Bye E, Foltynie T, et al. Deep brain stimulation can suppress pathological synchronisation in parkinsonian patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 2011; 82 (5): 569–573.
  10. 10. Drouot X, Oshino S, Jarraya B, Besret L, Kishima H, Remy P, Dauguet J, et al. Functional recovery in a primate model of Parkinson's disease following motor cortex stimulation. Neuron 2004; 44: 769–778. pmid:15572109
  11. 11. Pagni C, Zeme S, Zenga F. Further experience with extradural motor cortex stimulation for treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease: Report of 3 new cases. J Neurosurg Sci 2003; 47: 189. pmid:14978472
  12. 12. Siebner HR, Rossmeier C, Mentschel C, Peinemann A, Conrad B. Short-term motor improvement after sub-threshold 5-Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of theprimary motor hand area in Parkinson's disease. J Neurol Sci 2000; 178 (2): 91–94. pmid:11018700
  13. 13. Khedr EM, Farweez HM, Islam H. Therapeutic effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor function in Parkinson's disease patients. Eur J Neurol 2003; 10: 567–572. pmid:12940840
  14. 14. Lefaucheur JP, Drouot X, Von Raison F, Menard-Lefaucheur I, Cesaro P, Nguyen JP. Improvement of motor performance and modulation of cortical excitability by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex in Parkinson's disease. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2004; 115: 2530–2541. pmid:15465443
  15. 15. Fregni F, Boggio PS, Santos MC, Lima M, Vieira AL, Rigonatti SP et al. Non-invasive cortical stimulation with transcranial direct current stimulation in Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord 2006; 21 (10): 1693–1702. pmid:16817194
  16. 16. Li S, Arbuthnott GW, Jutras MJ, Goldberg JA, Jaeger DJ. Resonant antidromic cortical circuit activation as a consequence of high-frequency subthalamic deep-brain stimulation. Neurophysiology 2007; 98(6): 3525–3537. pmid:17928554
  17. 17. Gradinaru V, Mogri M, Thompson KR, Henderson JM, Deisseroth K. Optical deconstruction of Parkinsonian neural circuitry. Science 2009; 324: 354–359. pmid:19299587
  18. 18. Yamawaki N, Stanford IM, Hall SD, Woodhall GL. Pharmacologically induced and stimulus evoked rhythmic neuronal oscillatory activity in the primary motor cortex in vitro. Neuroscience 2008; 151: 386–395. pmid:18063484
  19. 19. Rönnqvist KC, McAllister CJ, Woodhall GL, Stanford IM, Hall SD. A multimodal perspective on the composition of cortical oscillations. Front Human Neurosci 2013; 7 (132): 1–9.
  20. 20. Lacey MG, Gooding-Williams G, Prokic EJ, Yamawaki N, Hall SD, Stanford IM, et al. Spike firing and IPSPs in layer V pyramidal neurons during beta oscillations in rat primary motor cortex (m1) in vitro. Plos One 2014; 9(1): e85109. pmid:24465488
  21. 21. Prokic EJ, Weston C, Yamawaki N, Hall SD, Jones RS, Stanford IM, Ladds G, Woodhall GL. Cortical oscillatory dynamics and benzodiazepine-site modulation of tonic inhibition in fast spiking interneurons. Neuropharmacology 2015; 95:192–205. pmid:25797493
  22. 22. Johnson NW, Özkan M, Prokic EJ, Burgess AP, Wafford KA, O’Neil MJ et al. Phase-amplitude coupled persistent theta and gamma oscillations in rat primary motor cortex in vitro. Neuropharmacology 2017; 119: 141–156. pmid:28400257
  23. 23. Whittington MA, Traub RD Jefferys JGR. Synchronized oscillations in inter-neuron networks driven by metabotropic glutamate-receptor activation. Nature 1995; 373: 612–615. pmid:7854418
  24. 24. Traub RD, Whittington MA, Colling SB, Buzsaki G, Jefferys JGR. Analysis of gamma rhythms in the rat hippocampus in vitro and in vivo. J. Physiol. 1996; 493: 471–484. pmid:8782110
  25. 25. Fisahn A, Pike FG, Buhl EH, Paulsen O. Cholinergic induction of network oscillations at 40 Hz in the hippocampus in vitro. Nature 1998; 394:186–189. pmid:9671302
  26. 26. Traub RD, Cunningham MO, Gloveli T, LeBeau FEN, Bibbig A, Buhl EH., et al. GABA-enhanced collective behavior in neuronal axons underlies persistent gamma-frequency oscillations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100:11047–11052. pmid:12960382
  27. 27. Dawson TM, Gehlert DR, McCabe RT, Barnett A, Wamsley JK. D-1 dopamine receptors in the rat-brain—a quantitative autoradiographic analysis. J Neurosci 1986; 6: 2352–2365. pmid:3528408
  28. 28. Descarries L, Lemay B, Doucet G, Berger B. Regional and laminar density of the dopamine innervation in adult rat cerebral cortex. Neuroscience 1987; 21: 807–824. pmid:3627435
  29. 29. Gaspar P, Duyckaerts C, Alvarez C., Javoy-Agid F, Berger B. Alterations of dopaminergic and noradrenergic innervations in motor cortex in Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol 1991; 30: 365–374. pmid:1683212
  30. 30. Raghanti MA, Stimpson CD, Marcinkiewicz JL, Erwin JM, Hof PR, Sherwood CC. Cortical dopaminergic innervation among humans, chimpanzees, and macaque monkeys: a comparative study. Neuroscience 2008; 155: 203–220. pmid:18562124
  31. 31. Vitrac C, Peron S, Frappe I, Fernagut PO, Jaber M, Gaillard A, et al. Dopamine control of pyramidal neuron activity in the primary motor cortex via D2 receptors. Front Neural Circuits 2014; 8: 13–24. pmid:24616667
  32. 32. Williams SM, Goldman-Rakic PS. Characterization of the dopaminergic innervation of the primate frontal cortex using a dopamine-specific antibody. Cereb Cortex 1993; 3: 199–222. pmid:8100725
  33. 33. Sesack SR, Hawrylak VA, Melchitzky DS, Lewis DA. Dopamine innervation of a subclass of local circuit neurons in monkey prefrontal cortex: ultrastructural analysis of tyrosine hydroxylase and parvalbumin immunoreactive structures. Cereb Cortex 1998; 8: 614–622. pmid:9823482
  34. 34. Santana N, Mengod G, Artigas F. Quantitative analysis of the expression of dopamine D1 and D2 receptors in pyramidal and GABAergic neurons of the rat prefrontal cortex. Cereb. Cortex 2009; 19: 849–860. pmid:18689859
  35. 35. Gaspar P, Bloch B, Lemoine C. D1 and D2 receptor gene expression in the rat frontal cortex: Cellular localization in different classes of efferent neurons. Eur J Neurosci 1995; 7: 1050–1063. pmid:7613610
  36. 36. LeMoine C, Gaspar P. Subpopulations of cortical GABAergic interneurons differ by their expression of D1 and D2 dopamine receptor subtypes. Mol Brain Res 1998; 58:231–236. pmid:9685656
  37. 37. Muly EC, Szigeti K, Goldman-Rakic PS. D1 Receptor in Interneurons of Macaque Prefrontal Cortex: Distribution and Subcellular Localization. J Neurosci 1998; 18(24): 10553–10565. pmid:9852592
  38. 38. Hastings TG, Zigmond MJ. Identification of catechol-protein conjugates in neostriatal slices incubated with [3H]dopamine—impact of ascorbic-acid and glutathione. J Neurochem 1994; 63: 1126–1132. pmid:8051554
  39. 39. Hastings TG, Lewis DA, Zigmond MJ. Role of oxidation in the neurotoxic effects of intrastriatal dopamine injections. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996; 93: 1956–1961. pmid:8700866
  40. 40. Sulzer D, Sonders MS, Poulsen NW, Galli A. Mechanisms of neurotransmitter release by amphetamines: a review. Prog Neurobiol. 2005: 75(6):406–433. pmid:15955613
  41. 41. Raiteri M, Bertollini A, Angelini F, Levi G. D-amphetamine as a releaser of reuptake inhibitor of biogenic-amines in synaptosomes. Eur J Pharm 1975; 34: 189–195.
  42. 42. Mandel RJ, Leanza G, Nilsson OG, Rosengren E. Amphetamine induces excess release of striatal acetylcholine in-vivo that is independent of nigrostriatal dopamine. Brain Res. 1994; 653: 57–65. pmid:7982076
  43. 43. Lin Y, Quartermain D, Dunn AJ, Weinshenker D, Stone EA. Possible dopaminergic stimulation of locus coeruleus alpha1-adrenoceptors involved in behavioral activation. Synapse 2008; 62: 516–523. pmid:18435418
  44. 44. Cilz NI, Kurada L, Hu B, Lei S. Dopaminergic modulation of GABAergic transmission in the entorhinal cortex: concerted roles of alpha1 adrenoreceptors, inward rectifier K+, and T-type Ca2+ channels. Cereb Cortex 2014; 24(12): 3195–3208. pmid:23843440
  45. 45. Bland BH, Colom LV, Konopacki J, Roth SH. Intracellular records of carbachol-induced theta rhythm in hippocampal slices. Brain Res 1988; 447: 364–368. pmid:3390706
  46. 46. Leung LWS, Yim CYC. Intrinsic membrane-potential oscillations in hippocampal neurons in vitro. Brain Res 1991; 553: 261–274. pmid:1718544
  47. 47. Konopacki J and Golebiewski H. Theta-like activity in hippocampal-formation slices—cholinergic-GABAergic interaction. Neuroreport 1993; 4: 963–966. pmid:8369490
  48. 48. Bland BH, Colom LV. Extrinsic and intrinsic-properties underlying oscillation and synchrony in limbic cortex. Prog Neurobiol 1993; 41:157–208. pmid:8332751
  49. 49. Bland BH, Konopacki J, Dyck RH. Relationship between membrane potential oscillations and rhythmic discharges in identified hippocampal theta-related cells. J Neurophysiol 2002; 88: 3046–3066. pmid:12466429
  50. 50. Whittington MA, Stanford IM, Colling SB, Jefferys JG, Traub RD. Spatiotemporal patterns of gamma frequency oscillations tetanically induced in the rat hippocampal slice. J Physiol 1997; 502(3): 591–607.
  51. 51. Whittington MA, Traub RD, Faulkner HJ, Stanford IM Jefferys JGR. Recurrent excitatory postsynaptic potentials induced by synchronized fast cortical oscillations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1997; 94: 12198–12203. pmid:9342386
  52. 52. Whittington MA, Traub RD, Kopell N, Ermentrout B, Buhl EH. Inhibition-based rhythms: experimental and mathematical observations on network dynamics. Inter J Psychophysiol 2000; 38: 315–336.
  53. 53. Whishaw IQ, Robinson TE, Schallert T, Deryck M, Ramirez VD. Electrical-activity of the hippocampus and neocortex in rats depleted of brain dopamine and norepinephrine relations to behavior and effects of atropine. Exp Neurol 1978; 62: 748–767. pmid:750220
  54. 54. Weiss T, Veh RW, Heinemann U. Dopamine depresses cholinergic oscillatory network activity in rat hippocampus. Eur J Neurosci 2003; 18(9): 2573–2580. pmid:14622158
  55. 55. Benchenane K, Peyrache A, Khamass M, Tierney PL, Gioanni Y, Battaglia FP, et al. Coherent theta oscillations and reorganization of spike timing in the hippocampal-prefrontal network upon learning. Neuron 2010; 66(6): 921–936. pmid:20620877
  56. 56. Wojtowicz AM, van den Boom L, Chakrabarty A, Maggio N, Haq RU, Behrens CJ, Heinemann U. Monoamines block kainate and carbachol-induced gamma-oscillations but augment stimulus induced gamma-oscillations in rat hippocampus in vitro. Hippocampus 2009; 19: 273–288. pmid:19173289
  57. 57. Yang CR, Seamans JK. Dopamine D1 receptor actions in layers V-VI rat prefrontal cortex neurons in vitro: Modulation of dendritic-somatic signal integration. J Neurosci 1996; 16:1922–1935. pmid:8774459
  58. 58. Henze DA, Gonzalez-Burgos GR, Urban NN, Lewis DA, Barrionuevo G. Dopamine increases excitability of pyramidal neurons in primate prefrontal cortex. J Neurophysiol 2000; 84: 2799–2809. pmid:11110810
  59. 59. Sesack SR, Bunney BS. Pharmacological characterization of the receptor mediating electrophysiological responses to dopamine in the rat medial prefrontal cortex: a microiontophoretic study. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 1989; 248: 1323–1333. pmid:2564893
  60. 60. Harsing LG, Zigmond MJ. Influence of dopamine on GABA release in striatum: Evidence for D-1-D-2 interactions and non-synaptic influences. Neuroscience 1997; 77: 419–429. pmid:9472401
  61. 61. Gorelova NA, Yang CR. Dopamine D1/D5 receptor activation modulates a persistent sodium current in rat prefrontal cortical neurons in vitro. J Neurophysiol 2000; 84(1): 75–87. pmid:10899185
  62. 62. Surmeier DJ, Bargas J, Hemmings HC Jr., Nairn AC, Greengard P. Modulation of calcium currents by a D1 dopaminergic protein kinase/phosphatase cascade in rat neostriatal neurons. Neuron 1995; 14: 385–397. pmid:7531987
  63. 63. Hernández-López S, Bargas J, Surmeier DJ, Reyes A, Galarraga E. D1 receptor activation enhances evoked discharge in neostriatal medium spiny neurons by modulating an L-type Ca2+ conductance. J Neurosci 1997; 17: 3334–3342 pmid:9096166
  64. 64. Gorelova N, Seamans JK, Yang CR. Mechanisms of dopamine activation of fast-spiking interneurons that exert inhibition in rat prefrontal cortex. J Neurophysiol 2002; 88(6): 3150–3166. pmid:12466437
  65. 65. Gulledge AT, Jaffe DB. Dopamine decreases the excitability of layer V pyramidal cells in the rat prefrontal cortex. J Neurosci 1998; 18: 9131–9151.
  66. 66. Gee S, Ellwood I, Patel T, Luongo F, Deisseroth K, Sohal VS. Synaptic activity unmasks dopamine D2 receptor modulation of a specific class of layer V pyramidal neurons in prefrontal cortex. J Neurosci 2012; 32(14): 4959–4971. pmid:22492051
  67. 67. Hosp JA, Molina-Luna K, Hertler B, Atiemo CO, Luft AR. Dopaminergic modulation of motor maps in rat motor cortex: an in vivo study. Neuroscience 2009; 159: 692–700. pmid:19162136
  68. 68. Haggerty DC, Glykos V, Adams NE, Lebeau FE. Bidirectional modulation of hippocampal gamma (20–80 Hz) frequency activity in vitro via alpha(alpha)- and beta(beta)-adrenergic receptors (AR). Neuroscience 2013; 253: 142–154. pmid:23994151
  69. 69. Berridge CW, Foote SL. Effects of locus coeruleus activation on electroencephalo-graphic activity in neocortex and hippocampus. J Neurosci 1991; 11: 3135–3145. pmid:1682425
  70. 70. Brown RA, Walling SG, Milway JS, Harley CW. Locus ceruleus activation suppresses feedforward interneurons and reduces beta-gamma electro-encephalogram frequencies while it enhances theta frequencies in rat dentate gyrus. J Neurosci 2005; 25: 1985–1991. pmid:15728838
  71. 71. Walling SG, Brown RA, Milway JS, Earle AG, Harley CW. Selective tuning of hippocampal oscillations by phasic locus coeruleus activation in awake male rats. Hippocampus 2010; 21(11): 1250–1262. pmid:20865739
  72. 72. Madison DV, Nicoll RA. Actions of noradrenaline recorded intracellularly in rat hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurones, in vitro. J Physiol. 1986; 372: 221–44. pmid:2873241
  73. 73. Pedarzani P, Storm JF. Interaction between alpha- and betaadrenergic receptor agonists modulating the slow Ca2+ activated K+ current IAHP in hippocampal neurons. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1996; 8: 2098–2110.
  74. 74. Scanziani M, Gähwiler BH, Thompson SM. Presynaptic inhibition of excitatory synaptic transmission mediated by alpha adrenergic receptors in area CA3 of the rat hippocampus in vitro. J Neurosci. 1993;13(12):5393–5401. pmid:7504723
  75. 75. Madison DV, Nicoll RA. Norepinephrine decreases synaptic inhibition in the rat hippocampus. Brain Res 1988; 442(1): 131–138. pmid:2834010
  76. 76. Doze VA, Cohen GA, Madison DV. Synaptic localization of adrenergic disinhibition in the rat hippocampus. Neuron 1991; 6(6): 889–900. pmid:1675862
  77. 77. Cornil CA, Balthazart J, Motte P, Massotte L, Seutin V. Dopamine activates noradrenergic receptors in the preoptic area. J Neurosci 2002; 22: 9320–9330. pmid:12417657
  78. 78. Zhang WP, Ouyang M, Thomas SA. Potency of catecholamines and other L-tyrosine derivatives at the cloned mouse adrenergic receptors. Neuropharmacology 2004; 47:438–449. pmid:15275833
  79. 79. Yang N, Zhang K-Y, Wang F-F, Hu Z-A, Zhang J. Dopamine inhibits neurons from the rat dorsal subcoeruleus nucleus through the activation of alpha(2)-adrenergic receptors. Neurosci Letts 2014; 559: 61–66.
  80. 80. Mitrano DA, Pare JF, Smith Y, Weinshenker D. D1-dopamine and alpha1-adrenergic receptors co-localize in dendrites of the rat prefrontal cortex. Neuroscience 2014; 258: 90–100. pmid:24231738
  81. 81. Prinster SC, Hague C, Hall RA. Heterodimerization of G protein-coupled receptors: Specificity and functional significance. Pharmacol Revs 2005; 57: 289–298.
  82. 82. Rashid AJ, O'Dowd BF, Verma V, George SR. Neuronal, Gq/11-coupled dopamine receptors: an uncharted role for dopamine. Trends in Pharm Sci. 2007; 28: 551–555.
  83. 83. Gonzalez S, Moreno-Delgado D, Moreno E, Perez-Capote K, Franco R, Mallol J, et al. Circadian-related heteromerization of adrenergic and dopamine D-4 receptors modulates melatonin synthesis and release in the pineal gland. PLOS Biol 2012; 10(6): e1001347. pmid:22723743
  84. 84. Rebois RV, Maki K, Meeks JA, Fishman PH, Hebert TE, Northup JK. D-2-like dopamine and p-adrenergic receptors forma signaling complex that integrates G(s)- and G(i)-mediated regulation of adenylyl cyclase. Cell. Sig. 2012; 24: 2051–2060.
  85. 85. Leedham JA, Pennefather JN. Selectivities of some agonists acting at alpha 1- and alpha 2-adrenoreceptors in the rat vas deferens. J Auton Pharmacol 1986; 6: 39–46. pmid:3007522