Noninvasive optical inhibition with a red-shifted microbial rhodopsin

Chuong, Miri, Busskamp, Matthews, Acker, Sørensen, Young, Klapoetke · Nature neuroscience · 2014 · neuroscience · 10.1038/nn.3752 · record Chuong2014-noninvasive-optical-inhibition-with-a-red-sh
tag layer · index · concepts · authors · עברית

Where this record's text came from. faceted 2026-08 by reading the locally held text (xml); every evidence string verified as an exact substring of that text before merging. Claim type is method because the contribution is a reagent (a new opsin) plus its validation, not a claim about how the brain works; 'system-or-tool-building' from the supplied vocabulary fits the protein-engineering-plus-characterisation design, although the validation itself uses patch clamp, extracellular recording and Monte Carlo light-propagation simulation. The 'extends' relation names a class of prior tools rather than a single citation, but the comparison is explicit in the paper's own words and eNpHR3.0/ArchT are the named comparators in the experiments. Replication status untested: the paper reports no independent replication of Jaws. 2026-08-13, 2026-08-14 and 2026-08-15 schema-0.3 passes: every quote verified as an exact substring of the staged text and anchored at merge time; concept terms verified present; every edge endpoint an existing node.

12 quotations on this page contain a reference number where the paper printed a superscript. This journal style prints citations as raised numerals — parameters^12,13 — and the extraction flattened them into the line, so the sentence reads parameters 12 , 13 . The digits are citation markers and not part of what the author wrote. The quotes keep them for the same reason they keep every other extraction fault: a quote is reproduced exactly or it proves nothing.

How to read this page. The article itself is not reproduced here — this paper is not cleared for redistribution, so what follows is the tag layer alone. The evidence sentences are withheld with the article. The table at the foot lists every tag the record carries; each row names the facet it belongs to, and the whose words column says whether the tag records the paper's own wording or the tagger's sentence about the paper. Every tag links to each other paper in the corpus carrying it. The machine-readable edition of the same thing is the TEI file beside this one, where the tags live in standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.

Other fields define these differently the same word, defined another way in another discipline
principal component analysis 5 fields

Tags on this paper

Every tag the record carries, each linking to every other paper in the corpus that carries it. A tag appears here whether or not its words occur in the article — the spans below are only the ones a sentence in this paper licenses. Of the 20 concept tags on this paper, 4 are grounded in a quoted sentence. All carry the tagger's gloss of what the term means in this paper, which is not something the article can license.

Jaws cruxhalorhodopsin eNpHR3.0 ArchT photocurrents action spectra rebound transcranial transdurally optical fiber retinitis pigmentosa cone photoreceptors retinal ganglion hemoglobin myelination tdTomato trafficking sequences point mutations network inhibition apical dendrites Haemoglobin absorbs red light less than shorter wavelengths, so red-shifting the opsin's action spectrum lets usable light reach deeper brain tissue, which is what makes large-volume and transcranial inhibition possible. A minority of recorded neurons increase firing under illumination because inhibition of upstream neurons removes their drive (network disinhibition), not because the opsin excites them. optogenetic inhibition Halo57 light power degree of suppression uninfected dentate granule cells ANOVA ANOVA followed by a Newman-Keuls multiple comparison post-test ANOVA with Dunnett's post hoc test ANOVA with Dunnett’s post hoc test paired t-test two-tailed paired sample t -test Shapiro-Wilk normality test tested for normality with a Shapiro-Wilk test Kolmogorov-Smirnov test principal component analysis principal component analysis discrimination ANOVA with Newman-Keuls post hoc test paired t -test Dunnett system-or-tool-building

Legend

second reading	`alternatives`	an independent re-reading of a facet, recorded whether or not it agrees
relation to other work	`claim_relations`	how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies
claim type	`claim_type`	the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null
concept edge	`concept_edges`	an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it
concept	`concepts`	an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it
content tag	`content_tags`	a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper
contribution	`contribution`	what the paper claims to add
control	`controls`	an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation
limitation	`limitations`	what the paper says its evidence cannot support
mechanism	`mechanisms`	how the reported effect is said to come about
method	`method`	how the paper produced its evidence
object of study	`object_of_study`	what the paper is about — the thing it investigates
phenomenon	`phenomenon`	the effect or regularity under study
research question	`research_question`	the question the paper sets itself
sense	`senses`	a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it
transfer	`transfers`	a method or concept carried in from another field

The paper

The full text is not reproduced here. This article is not cleared for redistribution, so the page carries the tag layer only. Its evidence sentences are withheld; the grounding status remains with each tag, and the article itself is at https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3752. The reading view exists for the papers whose licence permits it.

Every tag on this page

alternatives 3 · claim_relations 8 · claim_type 1 · concept_edges 3 · concepts 4 · content_tags 54 · contribution 1 · controls 2 · limitations 9 · mechanisms 7 · method 1 · object_of_study 1 · phenomenon 1 · research_question 1 · senses 5 · transfers 4

Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 3 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.

facet	tag	field	conf.	whose words
object_of_study	how to silence neurons over large volumes and at depth without putting anything into the brain Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`object_of_study`		the paper's words
research_question	whether a red-shifted chloride pump can be engineered to give enough photocurrent for inhibition through intact skull Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`research_question`		the paper's words
contribution	Jaws, a cruxhalorhodopsin with the most red-shifted spectrum of any inhibitor, giving roughly threefold photocurrents at red wavelengths and enabling transcranial silencing 1-3 mm deep in awake mice Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`contribution`		the paper's words
claim_type	method Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_type`		the paper's words
phenomenon	optogenetic neural inhibition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`phenomenon`		the paper's words
method	system-or-tool-building Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: system-or-tool-building	`method`		the paper's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Haemoglobin absorbs red light less than shorter wavelengths, so red-shifting the opsin's action spectrum lets usable light reach deeper brain tissue, which is what makes large-volume and transcranial inhibition possible.	`mechanisms[0]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: A minority of recorded neurons increase firing under illumination because inhibition of upstream neurons removes their drive (network disinhibition), not because the opsin excites them.	`mechanisms[1]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	red light reaches deeper because hemoglobin, myoglobin and lipid absorb it less than blue or yellow Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[2]`	1.0	the tagger's words
mechanisms	the gain came from two point mutations plus trafficking sequences borrowed from a potassium channel Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
mechanisms	rebound after illumination is attributed variously to hyperpolarisation-activated currents or to chloride accumulation shifting the reversal potential Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[4]`	0.9	the tagger's words
mechanisms	ramping the light down rather than switching it off halves the rebound rate and delays it fourfold Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
mechanisms	the few neurons that increased firing are attributed to inhibition of upstream neurons rather than a direct effect Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`mechanisms[6]`	0.9	the tagger's words
limitations	The noninvasive results cannot be shown to be direct rather than mediated by network effects or illumination of superficial apical dendrites. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the noninvasive results specifically: WE CANNOT EXPLICITLY RULE OUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE OBSERVED NONINVASIVE RESULTS WERE THE RESULT OF INDIRECT NETWORK ACTIVITY OR APICAL DENDRITIC ILLUMINATION	`limitations[0]`		the tagger's words
limitations	Transcranial illumination cannot be confined to deep tissue with this setup. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: any claim of depth-specific inhibition: IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO NONINVASIVELY ILLUMINATE ONLY DEEP VOLUMES WITH OUR EXPERIMENTAL SETUP WITHOUT ALSO TARGETING SURFACE AND INTERMEDIATE LAYERS	`limitations[1]`		the tagger's words
limitations	Jaws still produces post-illumination rebound spiking, which constrains experimental design. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: experimental designs built on this inhibitor: JAWS DOES YIELD POST-ILLUMINATION REBOUND, WHICH LIKELY HAS IMPLICATIONS FOR CAREFUL EXPERIMENT DESIGN	`limitations[2]`		the tagger's words
limitations	Experiments were essentially unblinded and unrandomised. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: every comparison in the paper: NO BLINDING WAS CARRIED OUT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COTRANSFECTED OPSIN-GFP AND TDTOMATO DATA SETS	`limitations[3]`		the tagger's words
limitations	the method cannot illuminate deep tissue without also illuminating everything above it, so direct deep inhibition cannot be separated from surface or dendritic effects Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the same scope as items 0 and 1 - surface and intermediate layers are illuminated too, so deep effects are not isolated	`limitations[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	Jaws produces MORE post-illumination rebound than the inhibitors it replaces Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the choice between inhibitors: Quotation withheld - more post-illumination rebound than the tools it replaces	`limitations[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	myelination still affects light propagation, so red penetrance is not uniform across preparations Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the transfer of the penetrance advantage between preparations: MYELINATION MAY STILL AFFECT OPTICAL PROPAGATION IN NEURAL TISSUE	`limitations[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	the two beneficial mutations do not transfer to the halorhodopsin they were modelled on, so the engineering is scaffold-specific Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the generality of the engineering strategy: THE TWO HOMOLOGOUS POINT MUTATIONS DID NOT ENHANCE THE N. PHARAONIS HALORHODOPSIN - the mutations do not transfer	`limitations[7]`	1.0	the tagger's words
limitations	even improved, the restored retinal spiking reaches about 190 Hz against a wild-type range of 15-450 Hz Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the vision-restoration claim: THE RESULTANT SPIKING RATES ARE LIMITED TO LESS THAN 200 HZ, SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN THE FULL WILD-TYPE RANGE OF 15-450 HZ	`limitations[8]`	0.9	the tagger's words
transfers	Monte Carlo simulation of light propagation with Henyey-Greenstein and Gegenbauer-kernel anisotropic scattering phase functions, imported to predict how deep red light penetrates brain tissue and skull Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[0]`		the tagger's words
transfers	a rhodopsin from a halophilic archaeon, screened as a scaffold rather than studied for itself Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[1]`	1.0	the tagger's words
transfers	trafficking sequences taken from the Kir2.1 potassium channel to improve membrane delivery Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[2]`	1.0	the tagger's words
transfers	Monte Carlo modelling of light transport, used to justify the wavelength choice before any protein was made Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
controls	yellow light at 593 nm, close to the spectral peak of both opsins, used to identify which neurons express the opsin, with paired recordings of the same neurons across wavelengths Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: mistaking a non-expressing neuron for an expressing one when assessing performance at the red-shifted wavelength · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held	`controls[0]`	0.9	the tagger's words
controls	paired recordings with an acutely inserted 200-um fiber as a positive control against transcranial illumination through the intact skull - marked PARTIAL because the paper reports in its own words that this did not settle the question Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: hyperpolarisation of superficial apical dendrites, producing somatic or downstream network inhibition, as the explanation of the noninvasive result - the paper states it CANNOT EXPLICITLY RULE OUT that possibility · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): partial	`controls[1]`	0.9	the tagger's words
concepts	Jaws Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Jaws	`concepts[0]`		the paper's words
concepts	photocurrents Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: photocurrents	`concepts[4]`		the paper's words
concepts	rebound Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: rebound	`concepts[6]`		the paper's words
concepts	point mutations Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: point mutations	`concepts[17]`		the paper's words
senses	optogenetic inhibition here means a light-driven ION PUMP moving chloride inward, not a channel and not a synaptic silencer - the class matters because rebound and reversal behave differently Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[0]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	noninvasive means no implanted optical device; the skull is intact but the virus was still injected surgically, and the paper's no-surgery scenario is explicitly future work with a transgenic line Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[1]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	red-shifted is relative and small in absolute terms - a 14 nm shift from the standard halorhodopsin - and the practical gain comes from where that sits on the tissue absorption curve Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[2]`	0.9	the tagger's words
senses	percent inhibition here is computed over neurons SHOWING suppression, with unchanged and increased-firing units reported separately rather than folded in Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
senses	Jaws and Jaws-ER2 are two molecules differing in trafficking sequence and are reported separately throughout Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
alternatives	claim_type: method Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading reaching the same value. Recorded: method — note: a second reading reaching the same value from a different sentence. Not applied - a person decides.	`alternatives.claim_type`		the tagger's words
alternatives	method: screening of a rhodopsin class, two point mutations and trafficking sequences, then comparison against existing inhibitors in culture, retina, slice and awake cortex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value. Recorded: system-or-tool-building — note: a second reading, verbatim-verified, disagreeing with the value on the record. Not applied - a person decides.	`alternatives.method`		the tagger's words
alternatives	phenomenon: light-driven hyperpolarisation of genetically targeted neurons Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value. Recorded: optogenetic neural inhibition — note: a second reading, verbatim-verified, disagreeing with the value on the record. Not applied - a person decides.	`alternatives.phenomenon`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → the authors' earlier identification of red-shifted cruxhalorhodopsins from H. marismortui and H. vallismortis (the paper's refs 1, 18) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[0]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	extends → previous halorhodopsin silencers (eNpHR, eNpHR3.0) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[1]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	replicates → previous reports of a minority of neurons increasing firing during optogenetic inhibition (the paper's refs 3, 40, 41) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[2]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	extends → earlier hyperpolarising pumps, which addressed about a cubic millimetre Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	contradicts → the standing position that noninvasive optical inhibition was not achievable Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	critiques → existing inhibitors' red-light performance, at 10-30% of peak capacity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	extends → eNpHR-based cone reactivation in retinitis pigmentosa models, by widening the restored spike frequency range Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
claim_relations	confirms → prior reports that a minority of neurons increase firing under optogenetic inhibition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[7]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	EVIDENCE CORRECTED (RE-GROUNDED) · Jaws —is-a→ cruxhalorhodopsin Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. EVIDENCE CORRECTED: RE-GROUNDED. The old span described a screen of the class without naming Jaws. This sentence names both IN APPOSITION - 'a red-shifted cruxhalorhodopsin, Jaws' - which is kind-membership stated as directly as a paper ever states it. — strength of the relation: 1 Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but 'Jaws' is not named in this span, which identifies Halo57 as the cruxhalorhodopsin Jaws was engineered from; the relation holds only through that chain. also in: Jaws · cruxhalorhodopsin	`concept_edges[0]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	point mutations —causes→ photocurrents Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. direction on the measure: increases · strength of the relation: 1 · note: SIGN: increases, without moving the action spectrum - the two properties were separable also in: point mutations · photocurrents	`concept_edges[1]`	1.0	the tagger's words
concept_edges	Jaws —causes→ rebound Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. holds when: relative to eNpHR3.0 and ArchT - the comparison is between opsins, not against no opsin · direction on the measure: increases · strength of the relation: 0.9 · note: SIGN: worse than the tools it replaces. The paper reports the axis on which its own tool loses also in: Jaws · rebound	`concept_edges[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	ANOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ANOVA	`content_tags.statistics[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	ANOVA with Dunnett's post hoc test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ANOVA with Dunnett's post hoc test	`content_tags.statistics[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	paired t-test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: paired t-test	`content_tags.statistics[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Shapiro-Wilk normality test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Shapiro-Wilk normality test	`content_tags.statistics[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Kolmogorov-Smirnov test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Kolmogorov-Smirnov test	`content_tags.statistics[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	principal component analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: principal component analysis	`content_tags.statistics[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	ANOVA with Newman-Keuls post hoc test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ANOVA with Newman-Keuls post hoc test	`content_tags.statistics[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	Kolmogorov-Smirnov test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Kolmogorov-Smirnov test	`content_tags.statistics[7]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	paired t -test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: paired t -test	`content_tags.statistics[8]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	Dunnett Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Dunnett	`content_tags.statistics[9]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	Jaws produced significantly larger red-light photocurrents than the existing silencers eNpHR3.0 and ArchT at every light power tested in cultured neurons. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Jaws strongly suppressed visually evoked cortical activity in vivo and restored light-driven retinal ganglion spiking in retinitis pigmentosa model mice. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Jaws can mediate noninvasive transcranial optical inhibition of neurons deep in the brain of awake mice. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Transcranial red-light illumination cut firing by roughly 92% in suppressed units across motor, somatosensory, insular and piriform cortex. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Gradually ramping the light down cut mean rebound firing from about 52 to 23 Hz, suggesting that shaping light pulses may reduce rebound. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Jaws gave significantly larger red-light photocurrents than eNpHR3.0 or ArchT at every power tested Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	visually evoked activity fell by about 86% in Jaws-expressing cortex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	under red light Jaws inhibited about 89-97% while eNpHR3.0 fell to 27.5%, against 76% at its own yellow peak Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[7]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	transcranial illumination through intact skull suppressed firing by about 92% in neurons showing suppression, 1-3 mm deep Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[8]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	transdural illumination suppressed firing by about 86% in medial prefrontal cortex Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[9]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	efficacy was similar across several millimetres of depth and across baseline firing rates Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[10]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	in the retinitis pigmentosa model Jaws drove mean ganglion spiking of 189.5 Hz against 67.8 Hz for eNpHR, roughly tripling the bandwidth Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[11]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	REPORTED AGAINST ITSELF: Jaws produced greater post-illumination rebound than eNpHR3.0 or ArchT Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[12]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	ramping the light down cut mean rebound firing from 52 Hz to 23 Hz Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[13]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the two homologous point mutations did not enhance N. pharaonis halorhodopsin Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[14]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	CONTROL NULL: expressing Jaws did not alter basal cell properties in culture or in slice, and its kinetics matched other inhibitors Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[15]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	CONTROL BY DESIGN: cells were selected by an independent tdTomato marker so the photocurrent comparison could not be driven by opsin expression level Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[16]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	DECLARED UNRESOLVABLE: surface and intermediate layers are necessarily illuminated too, so direct deep inhibition cannot be separated from dendritic or network effects Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[17]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	the conclusion is downgraded accordingly to highly suggestive of direct inhibition rather than demonstrated Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[18]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	optogenetic inhibition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: optogenetic inhibition	`content_tags.definitions[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Jaws Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Jaws	`content_tags.definitions[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Halo57 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Halo57	`content_tags.definitions[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	cruxhalorhodopsin Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: cruxhalorhodopsin	`content_tags.definitions[3]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	rebound Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: rebound	`content_tags.definitions[4]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	retinitis pigmentosa Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: retinitis pigmentosa	`content_tags.definitions[5]`	0.85	the tagger's words
content_tags	Jaws Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Jaws	`content_tags.definitions[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	light power Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: light power	`content_tags.variables[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	degree of suppression Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: degree of suppression	`content_tags.variables[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	uninfected dentate granule cells Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: uninfected dentate granule cells	`content_tags.variables[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	photocurrents Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: photocurrents	`content_tags.variables[5]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	rebound Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: rebound	`content_tags.variables[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	transcranial Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: transcranial	`content_tags.variables[7]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	86 ± 3% — reduction of visually evoked cortical activity in Jaws-expressing visual cortex under yellow light Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	67.8 ± 7.0 Hz versus 189.5 ± 15.9 Hz — mean retinal ganglion cell spiking frequency driven through eNpHR versus through Jaws in blind mouse retina (a threefold bandwidth increase) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	14-nm — red shift of the Jaws action spectrum relative to the N. pharaonis halorhodopsin family Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	10–30% — fraction of peak capacity at which pre-existing optogenetic inhibitors operate under red light Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	1–3 mm — depth below the brain surface at which neurons were inhibited transcranially in awake mice Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	14 nm — spectral shift of Jaws relative to the standard halorhodopsin - small in absolute terms, decisive on the absorption curve Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[5]`	0.8	the tagger's words
content_tags	10-30% — fraction of peak capacity at which existing inhibitors work under red light Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[6]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	27.5 ± 30.3% — eNpHR3.0 red-light inhibition - note the spread exceeds the mean Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[7]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	189.5 vs 67.8 Hz — mean restored ganglion spiking with Jaws against eNpHR, against a wild-type range of 15-450 Hz Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[8]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	52 to 23 Hz — rebound firing before and after ramping the light down Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[9]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	1-3 mm — depth range at which transcranial inhibition was effective Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[10]`	1.0	the tagger's words
content_tags	13 suppressed, 9 unchanged, 3 increased — unit outcomes under transcranial illumination, reported separately Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.quantities[11]`	1.0	the tagger's words

Interpretive choices

Tags that could not be placed in the text:

none — every tag was located in the text

What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.