European Journal of Neuroscience
European Journal of Neuroscience, Vol. 29, pp. 1830–1841, 2009
doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06767.x
REVIEW
Sleep function: current questions and new approaches
Anne Vassalli1 and Derk-Jan Dijk2
1
Center for Integrative Genomics, Génopode Building, University of Lausanne, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
Surrey Sleep Research Centre, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, GU2 7XP Guildford, UK
2
Keywords: EEG, memory, non-rapid eye movement sleep, plasticity, sleep homeostasis, slow wave, spindle
Abstract
The mammalian brain oscillates through three distinct global activity states: wakefulness, non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep
and REM sleep. The regulation and function of these ‘vigilance’ or ‘behavioural’ states can be investigated over a broad range of
temporal and spatial scales and at different levels of functional organization, i.e. from gene expression to memory, in single neurons,
cortical columns or the whole brain and organism. We summarize some basic questions that have arisen from recent approaches in
the quest for the functions of sleep. Whereas traditionally sleep was viewed to be regulated through top-down control mechanisms,
recent approaches have emphasized that sleep is emerging locally and regulated in a use-dependent (homeostatic) manner.
Traditional markers of sleep homeostasis, such as the electroencephalogram slow-wave activity, have been linked to changes in
connectivity and plasticity in local neuronal networks. Thus waking experience-induced local network changes may be sensed by the
sleep homeostatic process and used to mediate sleep-dependent events, benefiting network stabilization and memory consolidation.
Although many questions remain unanswered, the available data suggest that sleep function will best be understood by an analysis
which integrates sleep’s many functional levels with its local homeostatic regulation.
Introduction
Sleep’s contributions to mental and physical health have been
established through large-scale epidemiological studies of normal
sleep and clinical studies documenting the adverse health consequences of disordered sleep (Drake et al., 2003; Reid et al., 2006;
Bliwise & Young, 2007). Understanding the mechanisms which
mediate these associations holds great promise for improving both
physical and mental health. This, however, will require a better insight
into the basic functions of sleep for the body and the brain.
A shared interest in sleep’s contribution to brain function and the
underlying neuronal and molecular mechanisms brought together
about 140 sleep scientists and clinicians, including 18 speakers, in
Lausanne (see Editorial). The focus of this meeting was on research
into the neural functions of sleep with an emphasis on the putative role
of sleep in neuronal plasticity. The researchers agreed that sleep serves
important functions for the brain but, when asked what these functions
are, the simple consensus that it was ‘all for plasticity’ did not emerge
and lively discussions broke out instead. For the purpose of this
review we discuss broad questions of sleep regulation and function in
the context of questions that arose during our discussion, during the
presentations of new research findings at the meeting, and in selected
recent publications relevant to the role of sleep in neuronal plasticity.
Background and traditional questions about sleep
function
Sleep can be defined on the basis of behavioural criteria (Table 1) and
on the basis of electrophysiological criteria (Table 2). Traditionally,
Correspondence: Dr A. Vassalli, as above.
E-mail:
[email protected]
Received 1 March 2009, revised 29 March 2009, accepted 30 March 2009
questions about sleep and sleep’s function are asked at the level of the
whole organism:
1. Do all animals sleep and is sleep function invariable across species?
Where in the phylogenetic tree does sleep emerge?
2. Should sleep be viewed as a recovery process, i.e. does sleep
contribute to brain function by reversing some of the consequences
of wakefulness? Alternatively, is sleep a distinct state, just as
hibernation is a different state, not thought to directly contribute to
waking brain function?
3. Irrespective of the nature of its function, is sleep an indispensable
state, endowed with unique properties that directly mediate
functions which could not be executed during wakefulness?
Alternatively, is sleep merely a permissive state, during which for
example recovery events optimally occur because of reduced
interference by the sensory and processing activities of wakefulness?
Many of these traditional sleep questions have not yet been
answered definitely, but this should not be taken as evidence for lack
of progress in the quest for sleep’s functions (Siegel, 2005; Allada &
Siegel, 2008). The easiest way to tackle sleep is from its less elusive
end: sleep need. Indeed, the study of sleep’s function has relied
heavily on the use of the sleep deprivation paradigm. This paradigm
has established that wakefulness is accompanied by an increase in
sleep propensity (Table 2) and sleep loss is compensated for by a
subsequent increase in sleep intensity and ⁄ or duration. The term
‘sleep propensity’ refers to the likelihood of sleep, at any level of
organization, global or local. At the behavioural level, the latency to
fall asleep can be measured and human subjects can report on their
level of subjective sleepiness, and both measures can be used as
indicators of sleep propensity. At the neuronal and circuitry levels,
bioelectrical events associated with sleep can be measured. Thus, both
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Sleep function and plasticity 1831
Table 1. Behavioural criteria of sleep
Species-specific posture
Behavioural quiescence
Reversible upon stimulation
Elevated arousal threshold
Rebound after deprivation
global and local correlates of sleep propensity can be studied and will
be discussed in this review.
The past decade saw an impressive expansion of the spatial and
temporal domains within which sleep and the effects of sleep
deprivation are analyzed. Sleep and sleep loss have correlates and
consequences over a wide temporal range, e.g. seconds (Destexhe
et al., 2007), days (Belenky et al., 2003) and months (Gais et al.,
2007). Furthermore, sleep and sleep loss are accompanied by changes
at many levels of functional organization, from gene expression to
network connectivity, from memory consolidation to emotions. Within
a given level of organization, sleep and sleep loss have correlates in
many different variables, e.g. alterations in cytokine production and in
the dynamics of electric field potentials in neuronal networks.
We will focus on some of the local aspects of sleep regulation that
have recently emerged. These local aspects have consequences for our
view on what constitutes the minimal unit in which sleep can be
observed and studied. Local aspects of sleep regulation also have
implications for the discussion on whether sleep is regulated in a ‘topdown’ or ‘bottom-up’ manner. One of the most robust markers of
change in sleep propensity is a change in the slow or delta
Table 2. Definitions of terminology and concepts used in sleep research
Electrophysiologically defined sleep phenomena
Electroencephalogram (EEG)
Measure of electrical potentials at the surface of the head
Vigilance (or behavioural) state
Corresponds to a set or constellation of behavioural and physiological variables. Experimentally assessed by the coordinated
recording and analysis of the EEG and the electromyogram (EMG) of a face or neck muscle, as well as by the recording of
eye movement, i.e. the electrooculogram. Three vigilance states are distinguished in mammals and birds: wakefulness,
non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep and REM sleep
Wakefulness
Vigilance state characterized by a low amplitude, high frequency, mixed EEG pattern
NREM sleep
Vigilance state characterized by high amplitude, low frequency oscillations, dominated by the slow ⁄ delta and spindle
oscillations (see below) and a relaxed muscle tone. In animal studies that use the term paradoxical sleep (see below),
NREM sleep is referred to as slow wave sleep
REM sleep
Vigilance state characterized by an EEG resembling wake or stage-1 sleep in humans, in association with muscle atonia.
In rodents, REM sleep is dominated by theta oscillations (see below). In some animal studies REM sleep is referred to as
paradoxical sleep
Slow wave sleep (SWS)
The deepest stages of NREM sleep (stages 3 and 4 in humans) during which slow ⁄ delta waves are especially prevalent
and arousal thresholds highest
Slow waves (or delta oscillations) EEG oscillations within the 0.75–4.5 Hz frequency range. High amplitude slow ⁄ delta waves are a defining feature of
(in this review referred to
NREM sleep stages-3 and 4, i.e. SWS
as ‘slow ⁄ delta waves’)
Slow wave activity (SWA)
(or delta power)
Mathematical variable extracted from the EEG which quantifies the amplitude and prevalence of slow ⁄ delta waves. The
relative value of SWA at the onset of NREM sleep can be accurately predicted on the basis of prior wake duration.
Because of this, SWA is widely acknowledged to reflect sleep need and is thought to reflect a sleep homeostatic process
The slow (< 1 Hz) oscillation
Rhythmic alternation in the activity of cortical neurons during NREM sleep. Intervals of high activity during which bursts
of action potential occur (‘up states’) alternate with intervals of almost complete silence and membrane
hyperpolarization (‘down states’). The slow (< 1 Hz) oscillation is assessed by intra- or juxtacellular recordings
Sleep spindles
Transient (0.5–2 s), spindle-shaped 10–15 Hz EEG features which prevail during early sleep (stage-2 in humans), and
also herald NREM-REM sleep transitions. Sigma activity refers to the prevalence and amplitude of spindle oscillations
in the 10–15 Hz range
Theta oscillations
EEG oscillations in the 5–10 Hz range. In rodents coherent theta oscillations are characteristic of REM sleep and
exploratory waking behaviour and are thought to be of hippocampal origin. In humans, the origin of the EEG activity
in this frequency range is less clear
Definitions of concepts
Sleep propensity
Synaptic strength (or weight)
Probability or tendency to be in or to transition into a sleep state. At the global level sleep propensity can be assessed
behaviourally. At the local level, it can be assessed using electrophysiological markers of the sleep state
Input–output relationship of a synapse
Synaptic plasticity
Ability to change synaptic strength and ⁄ or number
Hebbian (experience-dependent) Model by which correlated presynaptic and postsynaptic activity strengthens a synapse whereas uncorrelated activity
plasticity
weakens it. Long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD) are electrophysiological assays thought to
measure Hebbian plasticity
Homeostatic plasticity
Non-Hebbian regulatory mechanisms thought to counteract the destabilizing effects of experience-dependent, Hebbian
events and maintain postsynaptic excitability within a functional range. This term encompasses a wide variety of
processes, including synaptic scaling
Synaptic scaling
Mechanism thought to adjust all of a neuron’s synapses up or down in strength proportionally, so that while average
synaptic strength is regulated homeostatically, the relative strengths of individual synapses remain constant
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
1832 A. Vassalli and D.-J. Dijk
(slow ⁄ delta) waves measured by electroencephalographic (EEG)
recordings (see Table 2 for definitions). We will discuss the proposed
relationships between sleep slow ⁄ delta waves and changes in neuronal
network connectivity. From considerations about sleep-dependent
synaptic strength regulation and the role of sleep-regulatory substances, we will move on to models of the role of sleep in memory
consolidation. In this context, the two types of sleep, rapid eye
movement (REM) and non-REM (NREM) sleep, must be distinguished. Throughout, we will continue to discuss the functional
significance of the markers of sleep and sleep homeostasis we have
been using.
It has been established that sleep–wake regulation is closely linked
to circadian rhythmicity and some of the molecular mechanisms
underlying circadian processes have been elucidated (Takahashi
et al., 2008). This, together with the recognition that circadian
rhythmicity is also about temporal organization of processes that
contribute to higher brain functions such as memory and cognition
(Barnard & Nolan, 2008), and the recognition that some of the
proteins involved in circadian rhythm generation also play a role in
the homeostatic regulation of sleep (Franken & Dijk, this issue), has
led to a renewed cross-fertilization between these two research areas.
This review, however, will not discuss the mechanisms of circadian
rhythmicity in any detail. Furthermore, following early work by
Tobler (1983) and Kaiser & Steiner-Kaiser (1983), recent years have
witnessed the introduction of simple model organisms such as
Drosophila melanogaster (Shaw et al., 2000) and Caenorhabditis
elegans (Zimmerman et al., 2008) to study the genetic and molecular
aspects of sleep regulation as well as sleep’s contribution to central
nervous system function and development. Recently, birds have
appeared as major players in the sleep and memory consolidation
field (Jackson et al., 2008; Shank & Margoliash, 2009). In this
meeting, however, the emphasis was on new approaches in the study
of sleep in mammals. Finally, the role of sleep in glucose
homeostasis, metabolism and other physiological processes is being
increasingly studied (e.g. Dijk, 2008; Tasali et al., 2008), but this
review will focus on the brain.
We hope that an overview of the current approaches and concepts
may be useful at a time when scientists from many disciplines enter the
sleep field and new models, new methods and new reduced preparations for the study of sleep function are introduced at a high rate.
New approaches to the study of sleep function: is sleep
a global or local phenomenon?
The traditional definitions of sleep are based on observed behavioural
and physiological phenomena in the whole organism. Vigilance states
(Table 2) are defined as constellations of variables associated with
these phenomena, and in mammals and birds three vigilance states are
distinguished: wakefulness, NREM sleep and REM sleep (Table 2).
The animal is in one, and only one, of these vigilance states at a time.
In other words, vigilance states have been considered temporally
discrete and spatially global states, but recent observations indicate
that these concepts may require some refinement.
The discrete nature of sleep and wake states is challenged by the
following observations:
1. In the diseased brain elements of different vigilance states can occur
simultaneously. For example, in Parkinson’s disease, and in general
in REM sleep behaviour disorder, motor actions occur while the
patient is in REM sleep (Arnulf et al., 2008). Clinical recognition of
mixed states in sleep disorder patients led to the term ‘status
dissociatus’ as early as 1991 (Mahowald & Schenck, 1991).
2. Below the surface of observable behaviour, when analyzed with a
temporal resolution in the minutes to hour range, vigilance states
are not invariable. A defining feature of NREM sleep is the
occurrence of high-amplitude slow ⁄ delta waves. Within each
NREM sleep episode, slow-wave activity (SWA), also called delta
power, an EEG measure of power in the 0.75–4.5 Hz frequency
range (Table 2), gradually rises and abruptly declines prior to the
onset of REM sleep (Fig. 1). Furthermore, in the course of the
resting period (e.g. a night for humans) SWA declines over
consecutive NREM–REM sleep cycles. In contrast, wakefulness is
characterized by a low-amplitude, high-frequency EEG pattern but
the contribution of slow ⁄ delta and theta oscillations (5–10 Hz,
Table 2) increases as the duration of wakefulness increases. Thus,
as wakefulness progresses the EEG becomes more ‘sleep-like’
(Franken et al., 1991; Cajochen et al., 2002) and as NREM sleep
progresses, the EEG becomes more ‘wake-like’ (Dijk et al., 1997).
3. When analyzed with a higher temporal resolution, of the order of
seconds and less, the behaviour of cortical neurons during NREM
sleep is highly dynamic, yielding bouts of widespread highamplitude synchronized fluctuations in activity. These fluctuations,
known as the ‘slow (< 1 Hz) oscillation’ (Table 2) with a period of
2 s (Steriade et al., 1993), consist of intervals with high activity
during which bursts of action potential occur (‘up states’)
alternating with intervals of almost complete silence and membrane
hyperpolarization (‘down states’). These synchronized alternations
of up and down states appear in the EEG as slow waves and spread
coherently throughout the cortex as a travelling wave (Massimini
et al., 2004). It has been suggested that the ‘up states’ of slow-wave
sleep (SWS; Table 2) are dynamically similar to wakefulness and
provide a context for the ‘replay’ of firing sequences that occurred
in the waking animal, for example during execution of a specific
task. These ‘fragments of wakefulness’ may contribute to memory
consolidation (Destexhe et al., 2007). According to this interpretation, and at this temporal resolution, we are partly awake when
we are asleep but are not aware of this!
The global nature of sleep and wake states has also been challenged:
1. Local activation of specific brain regions during wakefulness,
through unilateral vibrations of hands (Kattler et al., 1994) or
twitching of whiskers (Vyazovskiy et al., 2000), leads to local
increases in EEG SWA during sleep in those brain areas that were
more active during wakefulness. One brain area can be more asleep
than another.
2. In dolphins and other aquatic mammals, EEG-assessed NREM
sleep can occur in one hemisphere while the other is awake
(Mukhametov et al., 1977; Lyamin et al., 2008). This unequivocally demonstrates that vigilance states are not necessarily invariable in ‘brain space’.
3. Sensory stimulation by whisker twitches and auditory clicks evokes
local field potentials in the cortex with amplitudes which fluctuate
between high and low values, be the animal awake or asleep. It has
been hypothesized that these fluctuations reflect local functional
state differences within individual groups of highly connected
neurons called cortical columns (Rector et al., 2005; Rector et al.,
2009, this issue). The high-amplitude responses are most prevalent
during NREM sleep and, it is hypothesized, represent a sleep-like
state, whereas the low-amplitude responses would indicate a wakelike state. The amplitude of these potentials fluctuates to some
extent independently of overall vigilance state and can be different
in the two hemispheres and even in adjacent cortical columns. This
suggests that some cortical columns may be ‘awake’ while others
are ‘asleep’, and this during either sleep or wakefulness.
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
Sleep function and plasticity 1833
Fig. 1. Time course of SWA (power in the 0.75–4.5 Hz band; lower curves) and activity in the spindle frequency range (13.25–15.0-Hz band; upper curves) recorded
under baseline conditions and after sleep deprivation (36 h of wakefulness). NREM sleep episodes were subdivided into 20 equal intervals and REM sleep episodes into
five equal intervals. Mean values per interval were calculated prior to averaging across subjects (n = 8, except for cycle 8 of recovery sleep, where n = 6) and are
expressed relative to the mean level in baseline NREM sleep (100%). The mean timing of REM sleep episodes is delimited by vertical lines and horizontal bars above the
abscissa [Reanalysis by D. Aeschbach of the data from Dijk et al. (1990)]. Adapted with permission from Elsevier, ª 2009 (Principles and Practice of Sleep Medicine).
These phenomena indicate that, although sleep appears in general to
be a global phenomenon in both time and space, at higher temporal
and spatial resolution, heterogeneity emerges. This leads to a set of
new questions concerning sleep function and the level of organization
considered.
Sleep function and the minimal sleep unit
Can we define a sleep unit, a minimal entity that would recapitulate the
essence of sleep? Identifying the minimal sleep unit may be useful
because this will help to identify protagonists, e.g. neurons, neuronal
groups or bioelectrical events, which display causal relationships with
sleep functions at the level of the whole organism. Do we need to
define this minimal entity in both space and time? Is the minimal sleep
unit a whole organism, a brain, a group of closely connected neurons,
a single neuron, a synapse? Is the minimal sleep unit a minute, a
second, one NREM–REM sleep cycle?
The traditional criteria for defining sleep include a species-specific
posture, a reduced but reversible responsiveness to stimulation, i.e.
elevated arousal threshold, and homeostatic regulation. There is some
consensus that the minimal sleep unit may be smaller than the whole
organism, even though a brain cannot adopt a species-specific posture.
This is, however, where the consensus ends and the discussions
become lively. This is in part because our preferred definition of a
sleep unit may very well be influenced by our tacit or explicit
assumptions about the function of sleep. To Jan Born, who studies the
effects of sleep on human memory, ‘sleep is a complex, systems
process’ (Born et al., 2006) and the minimal sleep unit is the entire
brain. For James Krueger and David Rector, individual cortical
columns, consisting of approximately a thousand neurons in the rat,
alternate between two states, wake-like or sleep-like (Krueger et al.,
2008; Roy et al., 2008). A proponent of the hypothesis that sleep plays
a key role in the regulation of neuronal connectivity and plasticity is
unlikely to accept the isolated neuron as the minimal sleep unit
whereas the proponents of the ‘sleep replenishes energy stores of the
brain’ may very well accept the neuron as the minimal unit. The
intermingling of descriptive and functional elements is not uncommon
and even at the level of the whole organism functional elements are
included in the definition of sleep. For example, current definitions of
sleep include the requirement that it is ‘homeostatically regulated’, i.e.
that loss of it must be compensated for by a subsequent increase in
either its intensity or duration, or both (Tobler, 1983; Zimmerman
et al., 2008).
The consensus which emerged was that it is permissible that
definitions of sleep contain function-oriented elements because, after
all, sleep researchers search for the contribution of sleep to brain
function. It is, however, questionable that we can develop a definition
of the minimal sleep unit in the absence of a clear understanding of
sleep’s function at the level of the whole organism. Because we are in
this catch-22, spending much time on the definition of the minimal
sleep unit may not be productive. It may be more fruitful to accept that
sleep- and wake-like phenomena can be observed in units that are
smaller than an organism, a brain, a hemisphere, a network, etc.
Studying sleep-like phenomena and their function in sleep units of all
sizes, and relating these phenomena at the ‘smaller unit level’ to sleep
and its functions as observed at the level of the ultimate sleep unit, i.e.
the whole organism living in its 24-h environment, is the most
promising avenue to further progress.
During these discussions about sleep function and the minimal sleep
unit it also emerged that another contentious issue was whether we
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
1834 A. Vassalli and D.-J. Dijk
According to some (Krueger & Obal, 1993), sleep is a self-organizing
property of any viable neuronal assembly. According to this view,
alternating active (‘wake’) and silent (‘sleep’) phases will emerge in
any neuronal network. Sleep is thus a local network process that
emerges from the bottom up and that would proceed in the absence of
top-down regulation by specialized neuroanatomical circuits or nuclei.
It is the local activity within a network or minimal sleep unit that will
determine the likelihood of sleep to occur and it is at this local level
that clues about the function of sleep are to be found.
A bottom-up view is consistent with the local differences in the
intensity of NREM sleep SWA as induced by local activation during
wakefulness and the local regulation of ‘sleep states’ in cortical
columns, as well as the remarkable persistence of sleep-like phenomena after widespread lesions across the brain. The bottom-up view is,
however, to a first approximation inconsistent with the highly
orchestrated nature of the occurrence of vigilance states and the
accompanying changes in multiple state variables across the brain and
body. In mammals, the complex phenomena of NREM and REM sleep
emerge through interaction of local networks and top-down control by
neuroanatomical circuitry (Saper et al., 2005; Luppi et al., 2006; Fort
et al., 2009, this issue), disruption of which leads to disruption of the
normal characteristics of sleep and wakefulness. A prominent example
of loss of top-down control is narcolepsy, in which disruption of the
orexinergic systems leads to severe disruption in the regulation of
behavioural state transitions, including pathological transitions
between wakefulness and REM sleep and co-occurrence of consciousness and muscle atonia (Nishino, 2007). Another prominent
example of top-down control is the circadian control of sleep, in the
absence of which the temporal organization of sleep and wakefulness
into long episodes of wakefulness (e.g. 16 h) and sleep (e.g. 8 h) is
lost, but sleep and its homeostatic regulation persist (Trachsel et al.,
1992; Edgar et al., 1993). The existence of top-down orchestration,
however, does not imply that essentials of sleep function could not be
related to some of the ‘bottom processes’ that determine local variation
in the probability of being in a sleep-like state, i.e. variation in sleep
propensity. Understanding local variation in sleep propensity may
provide important clues to sleep function and it seems reasonable to
assume that bottom-up phenomena emerged first in evolution and later
became controlled by specialized sleep-regulatory centres, to optimize
spatial and temporal organization of vigilance states which in turn
should contribute to behavioural adaptation (Krueger et al., 2008).
established beyond doubt that sleep deprivation leads to sleepiness and
changes in subsequent sleep duration and structure. These responses to
sleep deprivation are one manifestation of sleep-homeostatic regulation, which in essence implies that sleep propensity and the contents of
sleep depend on vigilance state history. The phenomenon of sleep
homeostasis is very well established and understanding the mechanisms underlying sleep homeostasis has almost become a proxy for
understanding sleep function.
It may be thought that measuring sleep propensity is a good
approach to monitoring the time course of the sleep homeostat during
a normal waking episode, but it is not. This is because at the global
level sleep propensity is regulated through interactions of sleep
homeostasis and circadian rhythmicity (Borbély, 1982; Daan et al.,
1984; Dijk & Czeisler, 1995). In this conceptualisation, time spent
awake results in physical changes in brain neural networks. During the
day (in the case of diurnal species such as humans) these changes do
not, however, lead to an overt and proportional increase in sleepiness
(sleep propensity) (Dijk et al., 1987) or to performance deterioration
(Dijk et al., 1992). It is thought that the mechanism underlying the
absence of an increase in sleep propensity and performance deterioration is related to wake-promoting (activating) inputs at the level of
either the hypothalamus or the cortex (Edgar et al., 1993; Saint-Mleux
et al., 2007). Whereas during the day this activating input ‘masks’ the
effects of sustained wakefulness on sleep propensity and performance,
during the night these activating inputs diminish and the effects of
sustained wakefulness on the brain can now manifest themselves as
increased sleep propensity or, in the case of attempting to stay awake,
deteriorating performance. The circadian pacemaker, in mammals
located in the suprachiasmatic nucleus of the hypothalamus, is thought
to drive these activating inputs and, in a top-down manner, organise
the temporal pattern of sleep and wakefulness (Dijk & von Schantz,
2005).
Thus sleep propensity and performance are not really directly
reflecting time awake and its effects on neural networks. Shadows of
the covert effects of sustained wakefulness on neural networks can,
however, be observed at the global level in the EEG while the brain is
awake: as mentioned above, slow ⁄ delta and theta wave activity
increase with increasing duration of wakefulness (Franken et al., 1991;
Cajochen et al., 2002). These changes in neural networks manifest
themselves most prominently during NREM sleep: SWA in the EEG
during repeated nap sleep increases monotonically with increasing
duration of wakefulness (Dijk et al., 1987). When we override the
circadian control on sleep propensity and sleep is initiated during the
day, SWA during NREM sleep is very little affected by the circadian
pacemaker. Thus even though many aspects of sleep, i.e. sleep
propensity, sleep spindles (which are oscillations in the 10–15 Hz
frequency range; Table 2) and REM sleep, are under circadian control,
SWA and its decline during sleep are nearly independent of circadian
phase (Dijk & Czeisler, 1995). This is strong evidence in support of
the hypothesis that wakefulness leads to unidentified changes in the
brain and that these changes are reversed during sleep, i.e. sleep
homeostasis. Because of its response to sleep deprivation and its near
independence of the circadian process, SWA is considered a good
marker of sleep homeostasis.
The regulation of global and local sleep propensity
SWA vs. the duration of NREM sleep: how good is SWA
as a marker of sleep homeostasis?
should assume that sleep has one primary function or many. If we
accept that sleep may have multiple (very important) functions, some
of these functions may be fulfilled at the cellular level, e.g. energy
balance-related functions, whereas other functions of sleep, e.g.
plasticity or memory consolidation, may only emerge at the network
or systems level. Abolishing the quest for the ultimate function of
sleep may be liberating and may open our eyes to a multitude of sleep
functions, but the desire to identify a primordial function of sleep
remains strong because this function would have been the driver for
the emergence of sleep during evolution.
‘Top-down’ or ‘bottom-up’ control of sleep–wake states?
Global organization of sleep propensity: circadian
and homeostatic components
Searching for alterations in brain function following sleep deprivation
has been a popular paradigm in the study of sleep function. It has been
SWA is widely considered to be a good marker of sleep homeostasis by
researchers who use it as their proxy for sleep need. However, although
the variation in SWA upon sleep onset, and its decline during NREM
sleep, can be accurately predicted on the basis of prior sleep–wake
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
Sleep function and plasticity 1835
history, it has been known for many years that SWA fails to predict
sleep duration. Thus, rats that were sleep-deprived for 24 h showed a
marked increase in SWA above baseline values during the initial 4 h of
recovery sleep (‘positive sleep rebound’). SWA then quickly declined
to values below baseline and remained below baseline until 36 h into
recovery (‘negative rebound’). Yet throughout this period rats slept
more than baseline (Franken et al., 1991). SWA does not, therefore,
reflect the human or animal’s apparent sleep need and this has led to the
notion that sleep intensity and sleep duration are regulated separately
(Borbély, 1982). The take-home message is that only one aspect of
sleep homeostasis is accounted for by SWA and understanding SWA
may not necessarily hold clues to all functions of sleep.
Local correlates of sleep propensity: sleep-regulatory
substances (SRSs) and synaptic strength
Although sleep homeostasis is well established, a key unanswered
question is in what form, i.e. metabolic, molecular, structural or
bioelectrical, is past waking and sleep activity recorded? In other
words, what does the sleep homeostat sense? To answer this question,
total sleep deprivation is the obvious paradigm to use but other
paradigms in which the contents of wakefulness are changed, through
specific (learning) tasks or stimulation of specific sensory pathways,
can also be used and may be more informative.
Biochemical correlates of the effects of sleep–wake history have
long been sought. Originally it was shown that sleepiness could be
transferred from one animal to another, using material extracted from
the cerebrospinal fluid or brain of sleep-deprived animals (Pappenheimer et al., 1975). More recently, sleepiness, or at least some aspects
of the consequences of sleep deprivation, were successfully transferred
to a dish: the responsiveness of orexin neurons to noradrenaline
remarkably changes from excitatory to inhibitory when the hypothalamic slices that contain them are taken from animals having
undergone 2 h of sleep deprivation rather than from animals allowed
to sleep. These effects appear mediated by postsynaptic mechanisms
(Grivel et al., 2005). Sleep deprivation has also been shown to
increase the strength of glutamatergic synapses on orexin neurons
(Rao et al., 2007). Thus at the local level, sleep homeostasis is
reflected by changes in neuronal responsiveness and synaptic strengths
of, in this case, orexin neurons. These changes in the orexinergic
system provide us with mechanisms by which wakefulness may lead
to an increase in the propensity to fall asleep, yet they do not
necessarily provide us with clues about sleep’s contribution to neural
function.
One molecule that has received much attention as a potential
biochemical mediator of sleep homeostasis is adenosine. Some cells
release adenosine triphosphate (ATP) from synaptic vesicles together
with neurotransmitters, possibly providing an index of prior synaptic
use. This ATP is rapidly hydrolyzed to adenosine (Krueger et al.,
2008). During prolonged wakefulness extracellular concentrations of
adenosine increase, in particular in basal forebrain areas (PorkkaHeiskanen et al., 2000). Adenosine’s effects on A1 receptors and
associated activation of K+ channels and inhibition of Ca2+ entry leads
to inhibition of neural activity, an increase in sleep propensity and
ultimately to SWS (Basheer et al., 2000). Adenosine may only be a
member of the group of SRSs, which include interleukin-1b, tumor
necrosis factor a (TNFa), brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF)
and epidermal growth factor, all of which have been shown to induce
sleep and ⁄ or to be induced by sleep loss (Krueger et al., 2008). It is
thought that electrical activity patterns and associated postsynaptic
events that prevail during wakefulness, and maybe in particular during
specific behaviours such as exploration, lead to the production of these
‘somnogenic growth factors’. Such effects can be observed in the
intact animal. For example, expression of BDNF is correlated with
time spent in exploratory behaviour (Huber et al., 2007) and BDNF
expression is thought to depend on neuronal firing rates. This growth
factor and others such as TNFa are on the one hand somnogenic and
on the other hand thought to activate the molecular machinery
required for synaptic plasticity (see below).
Sleep deprivation studies in which appropriate controls for circadian
processes were implemented have also been used to identify changes
in gene expression profiles in association with vigilance state and
circadian rhythmicity. Early rat studies (Cirelli et al., 2004) and more
recent mouse studies indicate that there is specific variation around the
clock in brain RNA expression, driven to a large extent by the
alternation between sleep and wakefulness and to a smaller extent by
circadian rhythmicity (Maret et al., 2007). In a recent study in which it
was attempted to identify those transcripts that were specifically up- or
down-regulated, in the brain and not the liver, by 6 h of enforced
wakefulness rather than by circadian rhythmicity, and in three different
mouse inbred strains, one cDNA stood out: Homer1a (Maret et al.,
2007). This Homer1 gene alternate transcript is induced by neuronal
activity. This finding may be interpreted within the context of the
function of Homer1a in plasticity or protection and recovery from
glutamate-induced neuronal activity imposed by wakefulness. Gene
expression microarray studies are informative with respect to brainspecific response to sleep loss but they are blind to translational and
post-translational regulations, and no causality can be ascribed: genes
which are functionally implicated in sleep regulation are not
distinguished from genes whose expression merely follows sleep–
wake history.
Local correlates of sleep propensity: slow ⁄ delta waves
and synaptic strength
Another approach in the search for sleep’s contribution to neural
function has been to follow the EEG slow ⁄ delta waves, as a marker of
sleep homeostasis, to their origin. What are the underlying mechanisms of slow ⁄ delta wave generation? Intracellular recordings during
SWS have revealed that many cortical and thalamic neurons are
triggered to enter a characteristic burst–pause mode of firing when
excitatory inputs from diffuse neuromodulator systems are low and
their resting membrane potentials become hyperpolarized. This
hyperpolarization allows T-type Ca2+ channels (also referred to as
low-voltage-activated Ca2+ channels) to de-inactivate, mediate
Ca2+ entry and initiate a burst of action potentials (Steriade et al.,
1993).
Evidence that T-type Ca2+ channels are critical players in the
rhythmic synchronized burst discharges characteristic of SWS was
provided through analysis of mice bearing gene-targeted mutations in
T-type Ca2+ channel pathway components. Thalamocortical relay
neurons from mice deficient for one of the three T-type Ca2+ channels
(the a1G-subunit, also called Cav3.1) strikingly fail to enter the burst
mode of firing action potentials, whereas the tonic firing mode is
unimpaired (Kim et al., 2001). These mutant mice exhibit disrupted
sleep continuity, with a higher incidence of awakenings lasting > 16 s,
but not of brief awakenings lasting < 16 s, when compared to wildtype mice (Lee et al., 2004; Anderson et al., 2005). Oscillatory
bursting in neurons of the nucleus reticularis of the thalamus (nRT)
also appears important for slow ⁄ delta wave generation. Mice lacking
SK2, a K+ channel selectively expressed on dendrites of nRT neurons
and coupled to T-type Ca2+ channels, show a NREM sleep EEG
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
1836 A. Vassalli and D.-J. Dijk
characterized by weakened slow ⁄ delta and spindle oscillations, and
fragmented sleep (Cueni et al., 2008). Thus T-type Ca2+ channel
de-inactivation is thought to constitute a triggering event in slow ⁄ delta
wave generation and associated processes (Destexhe et al., 2007).
However, what underlies the gradual increase in slow ⁄ delta waves
in the EEG as observed after sustained wakefulness and their gradual
dissipation during sleep? In one scenario it reflects the variation in
levels of the wake- or arousal-promoting neuromodulators mentioned
above, namely monoamines, acetylcholine and orexins, and ⁄ or
variations in adenosine levels (McCarley, 2007). In a different
scenario, most relevant to the role of sleep in plasticity, variations in
slow ⁄ delta waves reflect changes in connectivity within cortical
neuronal networks. Krueger & Obal (1993, 2003) proposed that
changes in sleep propensity are related to local and use-dependent
changes in synaptic strength and hypothesized that sleep serves the
maintenance of the ‘synaptic super structure’. Tononi & Cirelli (2003,
2006) proposed that neuronal connections would become on average
stronger during wakefulness due to synaptic potentiation associated
with learning, and would weaken during sleep due to sleep-dependent
synaptic depression or homeostatic downscaling.
Here it may be useful to note that synaptic depression and synaptic
downscaling, although they may share molecular steps, were defined
as distinct phenomena. ‘Homeostatic plasticity’, which encompasses
‘synaptic scaling’ as well as a wide variety of other processes, refers to
mechanisms thought to counteract the destabilizing effects of experience-dependent Hebbian events, such as long-term potentiation
(LTP) and long-term depression (LTD) (Table 2) (Turrigiano &
Nelson, 2004; Nelson & Turrigiano, 2008). It is now still too early to
conclusively identify the specific synaptic plasticity processes that
occur during sleep and in which slow ⁄ delta waves are thought to be
involved, and the field remains equivocal in the use of these terms.
In any event, local synaptic strength (or weight, i.e. the input–output
relationship of a synapse) within cortical networks is thought to vary
over the sleep–wake history. Mechanistically, stronger synaptic
connections would increase network synchronization whereas weaker
connections would reduce network synchronization. According to this
view, which is supported by computer simulations and models of the
thalamocortical system (Hill & Tononi, 2005; Esser et al., 2007), these
variations in synaptic strength result in variations in slow ⁄ delta waves
within cortical networks, which appear as changes in SWA at the level
of the EEG. Across the sleep–wake cycle, changes in synaptic strength
are thus driving changes in SWA.
Furthermore, SWS-associated neuronal firing patterns, including the
slow ⁄ delta waves, are in turn assumed to alter synaptic strength. As
discussed below, the burst-firing mode of activity can induce LTD
(Birtoli & Ulrich, 2004; Czarnecki et al., 2007). Thus slow ⁄ delta
waves may both reflect and drive changes in synaptic strength.
Synaptic depression and ⁄ or downscaling are required because
otherwise all the experiences incurred during wakefulness would lead
to unconstrained synaptic weight growth. In this view, and at this level
of organization, the function of NREM sleep is synaptic weight
homeostasis, a process initially described in the developing nervous
system (Turrigiano & Nelson, 2004).
Electrophysiological and molecular evidence for sleep-related
changes in synaptic strength
Mathematical models of neuronal networks have shown that SWA and
other EEG variables, e.g. the slope of individual slow ⁄ delta waves (in
voltage over time, nV ⁄ s), as well as the slope and amplitude of evoked
potentials during sleep and wakefulness, can indeed be a measure of
network connectivity (Esser et al., 2007). These parameters have now
been shown in rat and humans to increase with wake and decrease
with sleep (Riedner et al., 2007; Vyazovskiy et al., 2007, 2008). To
what extent these variables are a simple monotonic function of time
awake and time asleep or are also modulated by the circadian phase
remains, however, to be established. Nevertheless, there is electrophysiological evidence for changes in synaptic strength in synchrony
with the sleep–wake cycle.
There are, however, contradictory reports on the direction of
synaptic plasticity occurring during sleep using molecular markers of
plasticity. Vyazovskiy et al. (2008) compared phosphorylation levels
of GluR1-containing AMPA receptors and other markers of LTP and
LTD after 6 h of predominant sleep vs. wakefulness in rats, and
provided evidence for net potentiation after wakefulness and depression after sleep.
In contrast, other authors emphasize the role of sleep in the
consolidation of cortical plasticity associated with synaptic potentiation. Using the classical plasticity paradigm of remodelling of ocular
dominance in the visual cortex of kittens submitted to monocular
deprivation, Frank and colleagues recently reported observations
seemingly at odds with the synaptic depression or downscaling
hypothesis (Aton et al., 2009). These authors initially showed that
sleep enhances ocular dominance plasticity and that this effect
depends on cortical activity during sleep through unknown mechanisms (Jha et al., 2005). They now report, using some of the same
molecular markers of potentiation or depression of glutamatergic
synapses as those used in the Vyazovskiy et al. (2008) study described
above, that sleep-dependent enhancement of visual cortex remodelling
is associated with synaptic potentiation (Aton et al., 2009). They also
show that sleep-dependent ocular dominance plasticity is inhibited by
antagonists of NMDA receptors or cAMP-dependent protein kinase,
known to inhibit LTP. Altogether, it is proposed that ‘off-line’
secondary waves of synaptic potentiation events occur in the primary
visual cortex during sleep that follows initial plasticity, and act to
reinforce cortical map remodelling.
Slow ⁄ delta waves and sleep spindles: effects on measures
of plasticity
EEG phenomena such as slow ⁄ delta waves may not just reflect
changes in synaptic strength but may actually play a causal role in
bringing about these changes. A systematic electrophysiological study
of how specific patterns of sleep-related neuronal firing affect synaptic
plasticity in cortical pyramidal neurons of rat brain slices was
performed by Daniel Ulrich and co-workers, as described below.
The two most conspicuous neuronal firing patterns of NREM sleep,
slow ⁄ delta waves and sleep spindles, are not only different in their
frequency range but are also very different in their regulation.
Slow ⁄ delta waves decline during sleep but sleep spindle activity
remains constant or even increases during sleep (Fig. 1). Whereas
slow ⁄ delta waves are not affected by circadian phase, sleep spindles
are under circadian control and are not markedly affected by sleep
deprivation (Dijk et al., 1997). At the behavioural level, variation in
both delta oscillations and sleep spindles have been reported to be
associated with consolidation of procedural and declarative memory
(Huber et al., 2004; Schabus et al., 2004; Schmidt et al., 2006;
Aeschbach et al., 2008).
Is there electrophysiological evidence that these phenomena may
contribute to plasticity and, if yes, in a similar or dissimilar way? One
approach to investigating how NREM sleep may contribute to
plasticity has been to investigate the effects of these specific firing
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
Sleep function and plasticity 1837
patterns on phenomena such as LTP and LTD, which have been widely
implicated in learning and memory.
In these studies, cortical pyramidal neurons were stimulated by
bursts of action potentials, which are the characteristic of slow ⁄ delta
waves, paired with application of an excitatory postsynaptic potential
(EPSP). This electrophysiological profile led to LTD (Birtoli & Ulrich,
2004; Czarnecki et al., 2007). In contrast, if the EPSP was paired with
a firing pattern mimicking a spindle oscillation, LTP was generated
(Rosanova & Ulrich, 2005). It is noteworthy that, in the same
experimental setup, application of a profile characteristic of the
waking state, i.e. individual action potentials mimicking tonic rather
than burst firing, generated LTP. In summary, these studies suggest
that the two hallmarks of NREM sleep both contribute to synaptic
plasticity, albeit in opposite directions.
A role for SWS beyond synaptic depression and downscaling?
Synaptic depression or downscaling during SWS may recalibrate the
strength of synapses within a functional responsive range, but could it
enhance the signal-to-noise ratio of stored (learned) information?
Could it actively contribute to memory consolidation? In a first
modelling attempt it was shown that an SWS-mediated downscaling
could indeed keep synaptic weight in check and maintain selectivity of
information that was stored (learned) during the waking day as well
(Sullivan & De Sa, 2008).
A parallel question is whether the well known negative effects of
extended periods of wakefulness and the positive effects of sleep on
performance (which are particularly clear in the absence of the
circadian confound; Wyatt et al., 1999), may be associated with
these changes in synaptic weight over the sleep–wake cycle.
Currently, no direct evidence for this link is available. However,
irrespectively of the mechanisms involved, there is some experimental evidence that SWS is beneficial for performance and memory
consolidation.
Consolidation can be defined as the progressive post-acquisition
stabilization, and sometimes enhancement, of memory that occur even
in the absence of training. Researchers such as Jan Born, Robert
Stickgold, Pierre Maquet and their co-workers believe indeed that
sleep does more for memory than synaptic scaling. For a variety of
memory tasks that are improved by sleep, brain activity was monitored
by brain imaging using positron emission tomography (PET) or
functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), before or at initial
training, during post-training sleep or at retesting. During post-training
SWS they observed (re)activation of activity patterns evoked during
learning (Peigneux et al., 2004; Rasch et al., 2007). The reactivations
were reported to correlate positively with the improvement in
performance on the subsequent day. Much earlier, using multi-unit
electrode recordings in rats during SWS, McNaughton and colleagues
reported ‘replay’ in hippocampal ‘place cells’ of similar spatial and
temporal firing patterns as were evoked in those cells when the rat
was engaged in spatial exploration and navigation across an arena
(Wilson & McNaughton, 1994). More recently it was reported that
post-training replay also occurs in cortical neurons, and this takes
place specifically during up-states of SWS (Ji & Wilson, 2007).
Cortical and hippocampal replays were found to be coupled temporally. It could not be determined whether these replays contribute to, or
only reflect, memory consolidation. Nevertheless, the concept that
memory consolidation evolves from repeated covert reactivation of
newly encoded memory traces during sleep has gained ground.
In addition, memory traces can undergo slow and major structural
changes in a sleep-dependent manner. The retesting 48 h (Fischer
et al., 2005) or 12 h (Walker et al., 2005) after initial training of a
nondeclarative procedural motor task (finger tapping) in humans
revealed profound alterations in task-concomitant patterns of brain
activation as detected by fMRI. These alterations were sleep-specific
and associated with gains in performance. They were interpreted as a
reorganization of the memory representations of the skill.
The scale of reorganizations of memory representations may be
such that retrieval of hippocampus-dependent memories becomes over
time hippocampus-independent, presumably due to a gradual transfer
to cortical networks, in particular to the prefrontal cortex (Maviel
et al., 2004; Euston et al., 2007).
Well beyond ‘synaptic consolidation’, sleep is thus thought to
contribute to memory by promoting a process of ‘system consolidation’ that leads to a redistribution of the memory representation
involving new neuronal networks not involved at initial encoding
(Dudai, 2004; Born et al., 2006). This may imply a ‘qualitative’
change in the memory, which can be manifested for example as the
memory may become less dependent on context, but richer in
schematic, abstract structure (discussed in Hoffman et al., 2007).
Memory consolidation can be thought to consist of synaptic and
system consolidation and, although much remains to be understood,
there is evidence for contribution of SWS to both processes. The next
near irresistible question is: are the slow ⁄ delta waves themselves
instrumental in SWS-dependent memory consolidation?
Local changes in SWA during the first half-hour of post-training
sleep are correlated with the overnight improvement in performance
on a procedural visuomotor learning task (Huber et al., 2004).
Slow waves can be manipulated to shed light on their causal links
with memory formation. Application of transcranial direct current
stimulation in humans can lead to an increase in < 3 Hz activity and
improvement in declarative memory (Marshall et al., 2004). In
contrast, brain stimulation with oscillations at 5 Hz (theta) left
declarative memory unchanged (Marshall et al., 2006). It is to be
noted, however, that the protocol used to enhance slow ⁄ delta waves
also enhanced spindle activity.
Furthermore, it has been reported that acoustic disruption of
slow ⁄ delta waves prevents the sleep-dependent improvement in
performance on a perceptual learning task (visual texture discrimination). In this study, the improvement in performance correlated with
SWA, when the control and experimental conditions were combined in
those 16 individuals (out of 20) who met a specific initial performance
criterion (Aeschbach et al., 2008).
Additional evidence for a role of SWS in memory consolidation
was derived by re-exposing sleeping subjects to an odor that had been
presented as context during the learning of a declarative memory task
(Rasch et al., 2007). This odor exposure led to a boost in post-sleep
memory retrieval if the odor was presented during SWS, but not if it
was presented during REM sleep. fMRI imaging revealed significant
hippocampal activation during SWS upon odor re-exposure. This
suggests that reactivation during sleep of a part of a complex memory
‘engram’ can have access to, and functionally alter, the wider memory
traces associated with it.
The evidence for an association between slow ⁄ delta waves and
plasticity is growing, but important unanswered questions and issues
remain. The quantitative relation between SWA and measures of
plasticity, and even, as mentioned above, the direction of this
association, as well as sleepiness levels and performance, have not
always been firmly established across the circadian cycle. Early, wellcontrolled studies have failed to identify a specific role for SWS in the
regulation of daytime performance (Bonnet, 1986) and results of
recent studies have not always been supportive of a role for SWS in
memory consolidation (Genzel et al., 2009; Schabus, 2009).
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
1838 A. Vassalli and D.-J. Dijk
Furthermore, whether the positive effects of sleep on declarative
memory is mediated by the slow ⁄ delta waves or the sleep spindles
remains unresolved (Schmidt et al., 2006). For some procedural
memory tasks, the case for a role of stage-2 sleep (i.e. NREM sleep
with few slow ⁄ delta waves and many sleep spindles) in consolidation
is much stronger than the case for SWS (Nishida & Walker, 2007).
In summary, there is a growing consensus that NREM sleep
contributes to plasticity and memory consolidation, although the
relative contribution of specific NREM phenomena such as spindles
and slow ⁄ delta waves remains to be established. The data in support
of a role for sleep in memory consolidation should not detract from the
observation that these effects may be learning-task-specific, and that
consolidation also occurs during wakefulness (Doyon et al., 2009).
A role for REM sleep in memory consolidation?
What about REM sleep? Is it also associated with memory trace
reactivation? Does it also contribute to memory consolidation?
Evidence that brain structures activated during learning are reactivated
selectively during subsequent REM sleep was obtained in humans
using PET imaging during and following visuomotor skill and other
implicit memory tasks (Maquet et al., 2000; Peigneux et al., 2003).
From these and other studies the notion emerged that, while
declarative, hippocampus-dependent memories would be strengthened
particularly during SWS, non-declarative, procedural memories (i.e.,
perceptual and motor skills) would benefit to a greater extent from
REM sleep (Born et al., 2006). Amygdala-dependent emotional
memories were also shown to benefit specifically from late REM
sleep-rich sleep (Wagner et al., 2001).
More recently, Born and co-workers cast doubt on the concept that
procedural skills benefit from REM sleep. They reported that
suppression of REM sleep by selective serotonin and noradrenaline
reuptake inhibitors did not impair consolidation of two different motor
skill tasks. In fact, accuracy in finger sequence tapping was
significantly enhanced by drug administration and the gain in accuracy
was positively correlated with the increase in number and density of
fast spindle oscillations (> 13 Hz) during stage-2 sleep and SWS
(Rasch et al., 2009). Therefore EEG-defined REM sleep appears not to
be required for memory consolidation of this particular procedural task
and in fact may be detrimental. A compilation of many recent studies
indicates that the hypothesis that REM sleep benefits the consolidation
of procedural tasks and SWS is for the benefit of declarative tasks is
too simple (Schabus, 2009).
early life in mammals and birds is a major contribution to a more
general view of the interrelationships between plasticity and sleep
throughout the lifespan and across two classes of the animal kingdom.
Gender- and age-related and other individual differences
in SWA and other EEG variables: implications for differences
in plasticity?
It is intriguing that aspects of sleep such as SWA and sleep spindles
which are thought to be implicated in plasticity and learning can
display marked interindividual differences under baseline (i.e. not
sleep-deprived) conditions. Gender and ageing are major factors
affecting sleep parameters. Thus, women have more SWS and higher
SWA than men (Dijk et al., 1989; Carrier et al., 2001) and ageing is
associated with reductions in SWS and SWA (Landolt et al., 1996)
and sleep duration (Klerman & Dijk, 2008). Twin studies indicate that
the interindividual differences in certain aspects of the sleep EEG such
as SWA have a heritability of well over 90% (De Gennaro et al.,
2008). The identity of some of the genes contributing to interindividual differences in sleep has been revealed. Polymorphisms in genes
involved in the adenosinergic system (Retey et al., 2005) and the
circadian gene PER3 (Viola et al., 2007) have now been shown to
affect SWS and SWA. Although sleep deprivation leads to an increase
in SWA in all these individuals, the magnitude of some of these
interindividual differences in the baseline EEG, including SWA, dwarf
the effects related to sleep deprivation (Tucker et al., 2007). An
important question to be addressed in future studies is whether these
interindividual differences in sleep measures are indicators of
differences in plasticity or, alternatively, reflect individual differences
in sleep characteristics, which are independent of the modulation and
involvement of the sleep process in plasticity, learning and memory. In
this context it will be important to distinguish between individual
differences in baseline values of sleep characteristics and individual
differences in the response to challenges. In other words, are these
differences reflective of differences in EEG-generating mechanisms or
in sleep regulatory processes which may be related to differences in
plasticity? Studies in mice demonstrate that genetic factors that
contribute to inter-strain differences in SWA (analogous to interindividual differences for humans) (Maret et al., 2005) are distinct
from those underlying the inter-strain differences in the sleep
deprivation-induced changes in SWA (Franken et al., 2001).
Concluding remarks
A role for sleep in plasticity during development?
A role of sleep in neuronal network plasticity is in accordance with the
predominance of NREM and in particular REM sleep in the early
postnatal animal life. Sleep amount is maximal at the time when
plasticity is maximal. As mentioned above, ocular dominance
plasticity during the critical period in kittens is enhanced by sleep
and this effect depends on postsynaptic cortical activity during sleep
(Jha et al., 2005). However, a related but distinct paradigm of
plasticity during development, recovery from monocular deprivation,
is not enhanced by sleep (Dadvand et al., 2006), showing that different
forms of plasticity in vivo are regulated by distinct mechanisms whose
dependence on sleep may differ. Recently, birds have emerged as
models for studying the role of sleep in two classical developmental
learning paradigms: imprinting in the domestic chick (Jackson et al.,
2008) and song development in juvenile zebra finches (Shank &
Margoliash, 2009). Establishing a contribution of sleep to plasticity in
Understanding sleep’s function and contribution to neuronal function
requires convergence of evidence from a variety of independent
assays, models, levels of analysis, etc. The research that we have
reviewed demonstrates that progress has been made in the understanding of the interrelations between classical EEG markers for
NREM sleep and sleep regulation and the associated molecular,
cellular and network events that mediate plasticity. Many questions
remain unanswered. Continuation and expansion of this multidisciplinary sleep research effort holds great promise for furthering our
understanding of mechanisms involved in the brain’s ability to interact
efficiently with its social and physical environment and adapt its
responses based on waking experience.
Acknowledgements
D.J.D. acknowledges support from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences
Research Council, Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Wellcome Trust-
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
Sleep function and plasticity 1839
UK, and the Higher Education Funding Council for England. A.V. was
supported by a Marie Heim-Vögtlin award from the Swiss National Science
Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations
expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the funding organizations. A.V. thanks Mehdi Tafti for support,
Paul Franken for many discussions and invaluable mentoring help, and Jan
Born and Daniel Ulrich for insightful comments. We thank Paul Franken, Reto
Huber, James Krueger and Anita Luthi for helpful comments on the manuscript.
Abbreviations
AMPA, a-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid; EEG, electroencephalogram or electroencephalographic; fMRI, functional magnetic resonance imaging; GluR1, glutamate receptor 1; LTD, long-term depression; LTP,
long-term potentiation; NMDA, N-methyl D-aspartate; NREM, non-REM;
REM, rapid eye movement; SRS, sleep-regulatory substance; SWA, slow-wave
activity; SWS, slow-wave sleep.
References
Aeschbach, D., Cutler, A.J. & Ronda, J.M. (2008) A role for non-rapid-eyemovement sleep homeostasis in perceptual learning. J. Neurosci., 28, 2766–
2772.
Allada, R. & Siegel, J.M. (2008) Unearthing the phylogenetic roots of sleep.
Curr. Biol., 18, R670–R679.
Anderson, M.P., Mochizuki, T., Xie, J., Fischler, W., Manger, J.P., Talley, E.M.,
Scammell, T.E. & Tonegawa, S. (2005) Thalamic Cav3.1 T-type Ca2+
channel plays a crucial role in stabilizing sleep. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA,
102, 1743–1748.
Arnulf, I., Leu, S. & Oudiette, D. (2008) Abnormal sleep and sleepiness in
Parkinson’s disease. Curr. Opin. Neurol., 21, 472–477.
Aton, S.J., Seibt, J., Dumoulin, M., Jha, S.K., Steinmetz, N., Coleman, T.,
Naidoo, N. & Frank, M.G. (2009) Mechanisms of sleep-dependent
consolidation of cortical plasticity. Neuron, 61, 454–466.
Barnard, A.R. & Nolan, P.M. (2008) When clocks go bad: neurobehavioural
consequences of disrupted circadian timing. PLoS Genet., 4, e1000040.
Basheer, R., Porkka-Heiskanen, T., Strecker, R.E., Thakkar, M.M. & McCarley,
R.W. (2000) Adenosine as a biological signal mediating sleepiness following
prolonged wakefulness. Biol. Signals Recept., 9, 319–327.
Belenky, G., Wesensten, N.J., Thorne, D.R., Thomas, M.L., Sing, H.C.,
Redmond, D.P., Russo, M.B. & Balkin, T.J. (2003) Patterns of performance
degradation and restoration during sleep restriction and subsequent recovery:
a sleep dose-response study. J. Sleep Res., 12, 1–12.
Birtoli, B. & Ulrich, D. (2004) Firing mode-dependent synaptic plasticity in rat
neocortical pyramidal neurons. J. Neurosci., 24, 4935–4940.
Bliwise, D.L. & Young, T.B. (2007) The parable of parabola: what the
U-shaped curve can and cannot tell us about sleep. Sleep, 30, 1614–1615.
Bonnet, M.H. (1986) Performance and sleepiness following moderate sleep
disruption and slow wave sleep deprivation. Physiol. Behav., 37, 915–918.
Borbély, A.A. (1982) A two process model of sleep regulation. Hum.
Neurobiol., 1, 195–204.
Born, J., Rasch, B. & Gais, S. (2006) Sleep to remember. Neuroscientist, 12,
410–424.
Cajochen, C., Wyatt, J.K., Czeisler, C.A. & Dijk, D.J. (2002) Separation of
circadian and wake duration-dependent modulation of EEG activation during
wakefulness. Neuroscience, 114, 1047–1060.
Carrier, J., Land, S., Buysse, D.J., Kupfer, D.J. & Monk, T.H. (2001) The
effects of age and gender on sleep EEG power spectral density in the middle
years of life (ages 20–60 years old). Psychophysiology, 38, 232–242.
Cirelli, C., Gutierrez, C.M. & Tononi, G. (2004) Extensive and divergent
effects of sleep and wakefulness on brain gene expression. Neuron, 41, 35–
43.
Cueni, L., Canepari, M., Lujan, R., Emmenegger, Y., Watanabe, M., Bond,
C.T., Franken, P., Adelman, J.P. & Luthi, A. (2008) T-type Ca2+ channels,
SK2 channels and SERCAs gate sleep-related oscillations in thalamic
dendrites. Nat.Neurosci., 11, 683–692.
Czarnecki, A., Birtoli, B. & Ulrich, D. (2007) Cellular mechanisms of burst
firing-mediated long-term depression in rat neocortical pyramidal cells.
J. Physiol., 578, 471–479.
Daan, S., Beersma, D.G.M. & Borbély, A.A. (1984) Timing of human sleep:
Recovery process gated by a circadian pacemaker. Am. J. Physiol., 246,
R161–R178.
Dadvand, L., Stryker, M.P. & Frank, M.G. (2006) Sleep does not enhance the
recovery of deprived eye responses in developing visual cortex. Neuroscience, 143, 815–826.
De Gennaro, L., Marzano, C., Fratello, F., Moroni, F., Pellicciari, M.C.,
Ferlazzo, F., Costa, S., Couyoumdjian, A., Curcio, G., Sforza, E., Malafosse,
A., Finelli, L.A., Pasqualetti, P., Ferrara, M., Bertini, M. & Rossini, P.M.
(2008) The electroencephalographic fingerprint of sleep is genetically
determined: a twin study. Ann. Neurol., 64, 455–460.
Destexhe, A., Hughes, S.W., Rudolph, M. & Crunelli, V. (2007) Are
corticothalamic ‘up’ states fragments of wakefulness? Trends Neurosci.,
30, 334–342.
Dijk, D.J. (2008) Slow-wave sleep, diabetes, and the sympathetic nervous
system. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 105, 1107–1108.
Dijk, D.J. & Czeisler, C.A. (1995) Contribution of the circadian pacemaker and
the sleep homeostat to sleep propensity, sleep structure, electroencephalographic slow waves and sleep spindle activity in humans. J. Neurosci., 15,
3526–3538.
Dijk, D.J. & von Schantz, M. (2005) Timing and consolidation of human sleep,
wakefulness, and performance by a symphony of oscillators. J. Biol.
Rhythms, 20, 279–290.
Dijk, D.J., Beersma, D.G.M. & Daan, S. (1987) EEG power density during nap
sleep: reflection of an hourglass measuring the duration of prior wakefulness.
J. Biol. Rhythms, 2, 207–219.
Dijk, D.J., Beersma, D.G.M. & Bloem, G. (1989) Sex differences in the sleep
EEG of young adults: visual scoring and spectral analysis. Sleep, 12, 500–507.
Dijk, D.J., Brunner, D.P. & Borbély, A.A. (1990) Time course of EEG power
density during long sleep in humans. Am. J. Physiol., 258, R650–R651.
Dijk, D.J., Duffy, J.F. & Czeisler, C.A. (1992) Circadian and sleep ⁄ wake
dependent aspects of subjective alertness and cognitive performance. J. Sleep
Res., 1, 112–117.
Dijk, D.J., Shanahan, T.L., Duffy, J.F., Ronda, J.M. & Czeisler, C.A. (1997)
Variation of electroencephalographic activity during non-rapid eye movement and rapid eye movement sleep with phase of circadian melatonin
rhythm in humans. J. Physiol. (Lond.), 505, 3.
Doyon, J., Korman, M., Morin, A., Dostie, V., Tahar, A.H., Benali, H., Karni, A.,
Ungerleider, L.G. & Carrier, J. (2009) Contribution of night and day sleep vs.
simple passage of time to the consolidation of motor sequence and visuomotor
adaptation learning. Exp. Brain Res. [DOI: 10:1007/s0021-009-1748-y]
Drake, C.L., Roehrs, T. & Roth, T. (2003) Insomnia causes, consequences, and
therapeutics: an overview. Depress. Anxiety, 18, 163–176.
Dudai, Y. (2004) The neurobiology of consolidations, or, how stable is the
engram? Annu. Rev. Psychol., 55, 51–86.
Edgar, D.M., Dement, W.C. & Fuller, C.A. (1993) Effect of SCN lesions on
sleep in squirrel monkeys: evidence for opponent processes in sleep–wake
regulation. J. Neurosci., 13, 1065–1079.
Esser, S.K., Hill, S.L. & Tononi, G. (2007) Sleep homeostasis and cortical
synchronization: I. Modeling the effects of synaptic strength on sleep slow
waves. Sleep, 30, 1617–1630.
Euston, D.R., Tatsuno, M. & McNaughton, B.L. (2007) Fast-forward playback
of recent memory sequences in prefrontal cortex during sleep. Science, 318,
1147–1150.
Fischer, S., Nitschke, M.F., Melchert, U.H., Erdmann, C. & Born, J. (2005)
Motor memory consolidation in sleep shapes more effective neuronal
representations. J. Neurosci., 25, 11248–11255.
Franken, P., Dijk, D.J., Tobler, I. & Borbély, A.A. (1991) Sleep deprivation in
rats: effects on EEG power spectra, vigilance states, and cortical temperature.
Am. J. Physiol., 261, R198–R208.
Franken, P., Chollet, D. & Tafti, M. (2001) The homeostatic regulation of sleep
need is under genetic control. J. Neurosci., 21, 2610–2621.
Gais, S., Albouy, G., Boly, M., ng-Vu, T.T., Darsaud, A., Desseilles, M.,
Rauchs, G., Schabus, M., Sterpenich, V., Vandewalle, G., Maquet, P. &
Peigneux, P. (2007) Sleep transforms the cerebral trace of declarative
memories. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 104, 18778–18783.
Genzel, L., Dresler, M., Wehrle, R., Grozinger, M. & Steiger, A. (2009) Slow
wave sleep and REM sleep awakenings do not affect sleep dependent
memory consolidation. Sleep, 32, 302–310.
Grivel, J., Cvetkovic, V., Bayer, L., Machard, D., Tobler, I., Muhlethaler, M. &
Serafin, M. (2005) The wake-promoting hypocretin ⁄ orexin neurons change
their response to noradrenaline after sleep deprivation. J. Neurosci., 25,
4127–4130.
Hill, S. & Tononi, G. (2005) Modeling sleep and wakefulness in the
thalamocortical system. J. Neurophysiol., 93, 1671–1698.
Hoffman, K.L., Battaglia, F.P., Harris, K., MacLean, J.N., Marshall, L. &
Mehta, M.R. (2007) The upshot of up states in the neocortex: from slow
oscillations to memory formation. J. Neurosci., 27, 11838–11841.
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
1840 A. Vassalli and D.-J. Dijk
Huber, R., Ghilardi, M.F., Massimini, M. & Tononi, G. (2004) Local sleep and
learning. Nature, 430, 78–81.
Huber, R., Tononi, G. & Cirelli, C. (2007) Exploratory behavior, cortical BDNF
expression, and sleep homeostasis. Sleep, 30, 129–139.
Jackson, C., McCabe, B.J., Nicol, A.U., Grout, A.S., Brown, M.W. & Horn, G.
(2008) Dynamics of a memory trace: effects of sleep on consolidation. Curr.
Biol., 18, 393–400.
Jha, S.K., Jones, B.E., Coleman, T., Steinmetz, N., Law, C.T., Griffin, G.,
Hawk, J., Dabbish, N., Kalatsky, V.A. & Frank, M.G. (2005) Sleepdependent plasticity requires cortical activity. J. Neurosci., 25, 9266–9274.
Ji, D. & Wilson, M.A. (2007) Coordinated memory replay in the visual cortex
and hippocampus during sleep. Nat. Neurosci., 10, 100–107.
Kaiser, W. & Steiner-Kaiser, J. (1983) Neuronal correlates of sleep, wakefulness and arousal in a diurnal insect. Nature, 301, 707–709.
Kattler, H., Dijk, D.J. & Borbély, A.A. (1994) Effect of unilateral somatosensory stimulation prior to sleep on the sleep EEG in humans. J. Sleep Res., 3,
159–164.
Kim, D., Song, I., Keum, S., Lee, T., Jeong, M.J., Kim, S.S., McEnery, M.W. &
Shin, H.S. (2001) Lack of the burst firing of thalamocortical relay neurons
and resistance to absence seizures in mice lacking alpha(1G) T-type Ca(2+)
channels. Neuron, 31, 35–45.
Klerman, E.B. & Dijk, D.J. (2008) Age-related reduction in the maximal
capacity for sleep – implications for insomnia. Curr. Biol., 18, 1118–1123.
Krueger, J.M. & Obal, F. (1993) A neuronal group theory of sleep function.
J. Sleep Res., 2, 63–69.
Krueger, J.M. & Obal, F. Jr (2003) Sleep function. Front Biosci., 8, d511–d519.
Krueger, J.M., Rector, D.M., Roy, S., Van Dongen, H.P., Belenky, G. &
Panksepp, J. (2008) Sleep as a fundamental property of neuronal assemblies.
Nat. Rev. Neurosci., 9, 910–919.
Landolt, H.-P., Dijk, D.J., Achermann, P. & Borbély, A.A. (1996) Effect of age
on the sleep EEG: slow-wave activity and spindle frequency activity in
young and middle-aged men. Brain Res., 738, 205–212.
Lee, J., Kim, D. & Shin, H.S. (2004) Lack of delta waves and sleep
disturbances during non-rapid eye movement sleep in mice lacking alpha1Gsubunit of T-type calcium channels. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 101, 18195–
18199.
Luppi, P.H., Gervasoni, D., Verret, L., Goutagny, R., Peyron, C., Salvert, D.,
Leger, L. & Fort, P. (2006) Paradoxical (REM) sleep genesis: the switch
from an aminergic–cholinergic to a GABAergic-glutamatergic hypothesis.
J. Physiol Paris, 100, 271–283.
Lyamin, O.I., Manger, P.R., Ridgway, S.H., Mukhametov, L.M. & Siegel, J.M.
(2008) Cetacean sleep: an unusual form of mammalian sleep. Neurosci.
Biobehav. Rev., 32, 1451–1484.
Mahowald, M.W. & Schenck, C.H. (1991) Status dissociatus – a perspective on
states of being. Sleep, 14, 69–79.
Maquet, P., Laureys, S., Peigneux, P., Fuchs, S., Petiau, C., Phillips, C., Aerts,
J., Del, F.G., Degueldre, C., Meulemans, T., Luxen, A., Franck, G., Van Der,
L.M., Smith, C. & Cleeremans, A. (2000) Experience-dependent changes in
cerebral activation during human REM sleep. Nat. Neurosci., 3, 831–836.
Maret, S., Franken, P., Dauvilliers, Y., Ghyselinck, N.B., Chambon, P. & Tafti,
M. (2005) Retinoic acid signaling affects cortical synchrony during sleep.
Science, 310, 111–113.
Maret, S., Dorsaz, S., Gurcel, L., Pradervand, S., Petit, B., Pfister, C.,
Hagenbuchle, O., O’Hara, B.F., Franken, P. & Tafti, M. (2007) Homer1a is a
core brain molecular correlate of sleep loss. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 104,
20090–20095.
Marshall, L., Molle, M., Hallschmid, M. & Born, J. (2004) Transcranial direct
current stimulation during sleep improves declarative memory. J. Neurosci.,
24, 9985–9992.
Marshall, L., Helgadottir, H., Molle, M. & Born, J. (2006) Boosting slow
oscillations during sleep potentiates memory. Nature, 444, 610–613.
Massimini, M., Huber, R., Ferrarelli, F., Hill, S. & Tononi, G. (2004) The sleep
slow oscillation as a traveling wave. J. Neurosci., 24, 6862–6870.
Maviel, T., Durkin, T.P., Menzaghi, F. & Bontempi, B. (2004) Sites of
neocortical reorganization critical for remote spatial memory. Science, 305,
96–99.
McCarley, R.W. (2007) Neurobiology of REM and NREM sleep. Sleep Med.,
8, 302–330.
Mukhametov, L.M., Supin, A.Y. & Polyakova, I.G. (1977) Interhemispheric
asymmetry of the electroencephalographic sleep patterns in dolphins. Brain
Res., 134, 581–584.
Nelson, S.B. & Turrigiano, G.G. (2008) Strength through diversity. Neuron, 60,
477–482.
Nishida, M. & Walker, M.P. (2007) Daytime naps, motor memory consolidation and regionally specific sleep spindles. PLoS ONE, 2, e341.
Nishino, S. (2007) Narcolepsy: pathophysiology and pharmacology. J. Clin.
Psychiatry, 68(Suppl. 13), 9–15.
Pappenheimer, J.R., Koski, G., Fencl, V., Karnovsky, M.L. & Krueger, J.
(1975) Extraction of sleep-promoting factor S from cerebrospinal fluid and
from brains of sleep-deprived animals. J. Neurophysiol., 38, 1299–1311.
Peigneux, P., Laureys, S., Fuchs, S., Destrebecqz, A., Collette, F., Delbeuck,
X., Phillips, C., Aerts, J., Del, F.G., Degueldre, C., Luxen, A., Cleeremans,
A. & Maquet, P. (2003) Learned material content and acquisition level
modulate cerebral reactivation during posttraining rapid-eye-movements
sleep. Neuroimage, 20, 125–134.
Peigneux, P., Laureys, S., Fuchs, S., Collette, F., Perrin, F., Reggers, J., Phillips,
C., Degueldre, C., Del, F.G., Aerts, J., Luxen, A. & Maquet, P. (2004) Are
spatial memories strengthened in the human hippocampus during slow wave
sleep? Neuron, 44, 535–545.
Porkka-Heiskanen, T., Strecker, R.E. & McCarley, R.W. (2000) Brain sitespecificity of extracellular adenosine concentration changes during sleep
deprivation and spontaneous sleep: an in vivo microdialysis study. Neuroscience, 99, 507–517.
Rao, Y., Liu, Z.W., Borok, E., Rabenstein, R.L., Shanabrough, M., Lu, M.,
Picciotto, M.R., Horvath, T.L. & Gao, X.B. (2007) Prolonged wakefulness
induces experience-dependent synaptic plasticity in mouse hypocretin ⁄ orexin neurons. J. Clin. Invest., 117, 4022–4033.
Rasch, B., Buchel, C., Gais, S. & Born, J. (2007) Odor cues during slow-wave
sleep prompt declarative memory consolidation. Science, 315, 1426–1429.
Rasch, B., Pommer, J., Diekelmann, S. & Born, J. (2009) Pharmacological
REM sleep suppression paradoxically improves rather than impairs skill
memory. Nat. Neurosci., 12, 396–397.
Rector, D.M., Topchiy, I.A., Carter, K.M. & Rojas, M.J. (2005) Local
functional state differences between rat cortical columns. Brain Res., 1047,
45–55.
Reid, K.J., Martinovich, Z., Finkel, S., Statsinger, J., Golden, R., Harter, K. &
Zee, P.C. (2006) Sleep: a marker of physical and mental health in the elderly.
Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry, 14, 860–866.
Retey, J.V., Adam, M., Honegger, E., Khatami, R., Luhmann, U.F., Jung, H.H.,
Berger, W. & Landolt, H.P. (2005) A functional genetic variation of
adenosine deaminase affects the duration and intensity of deep sleep in
humans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 102, 15676–15681.
Riedner, B.A., Vyazovskiy, V.V., Huber, R., Massimini, M., Esser, S., Murphy, M.
& Tononi, G. (2007) Sleep homeostasis and cortical synchronization: III. A
high-density EEG study of sleep slow waves in humans. Sleep, 30, 1643–1657.
Rosanova, M. & Ulrich, D. (2005) Pattern-specific associative long-term
potentiation induced by a sleep spindle-related spike train. J. Neurosci., 25,
9398–9405.
Roy, S., Krueger, J.M., Rector, D.M. & Wan, Y. (2008) A network model for
activity-dependent sleep regulation. J. Theor. Biol., 253, 462–468.
Saint-Mleux, B., Bayer, L., Eggermann, E., Jones, B.E., Muhlethaler, M. &
Serafin, M. (2007) Suprachiasmatic modulation of noradrenaline release in
the ventrolateral preoptic nucleus. J. Neurosci., 27, 6412–6416.
Saper, C.B., Scammell, T.E. & Lu, J. (2005) Hypothalamic regulation of sleep
and circadian rhythms. Nature, 437, 1257–1263.
Schabus, M. (2009) Still missing some significant ingredients. Sleep, 32, 291–
293.
Schabus, M., Gruber, G., Parapatics, S., Sauter, C., Klosch, G., Anderer, P.,
Klimesch, W., Saletu, B. & Zeitlhofer, J. (2004) Sleep spindles and their
significance for declarative memory consolidation. Sleep, 27, 1479–1485.
Schmidt, C., Peigneux, P., Muto, V., Schenkel, M., Knoblauch, V., Munch, M.,
de Quervain, D.J., Wirz-Justice, A. & Cajochen, C. (2006) Encoding
difficulty promotes postlearning changes in sleep spindle activity during
napping. J. Neurosci., 26, 8976–8982.
Shank, S.S. & Margoliash, D. (2009) Sleep and sensorimotor integration during
early vocal learning in a songbird. Nature, 458, 73–77.
Shaw, P.J., Cirelli, C., Greenspan, R.J. & Tononi, G. (2000) Correlates of sleep
and waking in Drosophila melanogaster. Science, 287, 1834–1837.
Siegel, J.M. (2005) Clues to the functions of mammalian sleep. Nature, 437,
1264–1271.
Steriade, M., McCormick, D.A. & Sejnowski, T.J. (1993) Thalamocortical
oscillations in the sleeping and aroused brain. Science, 262, 679–685.
Sullivan, T.J. & De Sa, V. (2008) Sleeping our way to weight normalization and
stable learning. Neural Comput., 20, 3111–3130.
Takahashi, J.S., Hong, H.K., Ko, C.H. & McDearmon, E.L. (2008) The
genetics of mammalian circadian order and disorder: implications for
physiology and disease. Nat. Rev. Genet., 9, 764–775.
Tasali, E., Leproult, R., Ehrmann, D.A. & Van Cauter, E. (2008) Slow wave
sleep and the risk of type 2 diabetes in humans. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA,
105, 1044–1049.
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841
Sleep function and plasticity 1841
Tobler, I. (1983) Effect of forced locomotion on the rest-activity cycle of the
cockroach. Behav. Brain Res., 8, 351–360.
Tononi, G. & Cirelli, C. (2003) Sleep and synaptic homeostasis: a hypothesis.
Brain Res. Bull., 62, 143–150.
Tononi, G. & Cirelli, C. (2006) Sleep function and synaptic homeostasis. Sleep
Med. Rev., 10, 49–62.
Trachsel, L., Edgar, D.M., Seidel, W.F., Heller, H.C. & Dement, W.C. (1992)
Sleep homeostasis in suprachiasmatic nuclei-lesioned rats: effects of sleep
deprivation and triazolam administration. Brain Res., 589, 253–261.
Tucker, A.M., Dinges, D.F. & Van Dongen, H.P. (2007) Trait interindividual
differences in the sleep physiology of healthy young adults. J. Sleep Res., 16,
170–180.
Turrigiano, G.G. & Nelson, S.B. (2004) Homeostatic plasticity in the
developing nervous system. Nat. Rev. Neurosci., 5, 97–107.
Viola, A.U., Archer, S.N., James, L.M., Groeger, J.A., Lo, J.C., Skene, D.J.,
von, S.M. & Dijk, D.J. (2007) PER3 polymorphism predicts sleep structure
and waking performance. Curr. Biol., 17, 613–618.
Vyazovskiy, V., Borbely, A.A. & Tobler, I. (2000) Unilateral vibrissae
stimulation during waking induces interhemispheric EEG asymmetry during
subsequent sleep in the rat. J. Sleep Res., 9, 367–371.
Vyazovskiy, V.V., Riedner, B.A., Cirelli, C. & Tononi, G. (2007) Sleep
homeostasis and cortical synchronization: II. A local field potential study of
sleep slow waves in the rat. Sleep, 30, 1631–1642.
Vyazovskiy, V.V., Cirelli, C., Pfister-Genskow, M., Faraguna, U. & Tononi, G.
(2008) Molecular and electrophysiological evidence for net synaptic
potentiation in wake and depression in sleep. Nat. Neurosci., 11, 200–208.
Wagner, U., Gais, S. & Born, J. (2001) Emotional memory formation is
enhanced across sleep intervals with high amounts of rapid eye movement
sleep. Learn. Mem., 8, 112–119.
Walker, M.P., Stickgold, R., Alsop, D., Gaab, N. & Schlaug, G. (2005) Sleepdependent motor memory plasticity in the human brain. Neuroscience, 133,
911–917.
Wilson, M.A. & McNaughton, B.L. (1994) Reactivation of hippocampal
ensemble memories during sleep. Science, 265, 676–679.
Wyatt, J.K., Ritz-De Cecco, A., Czeisler, C.A. & Dijk, D.J. (1999) Circadian
temperature and melatonin rhythms, sleep, and neurobehavioral function in
humans living on a 20-h day. Am. J. Physiol., 277, R1152–R1163.
Zimmerman, J.E., Naidoo, N., Raizen, D.M. & Pack, A.I. (2008) Conservation
of sleep: insights from non-mammalian model systems. Trends Neurosci., 31,
371–376.
ª The Authors (2009). Journal Compilation ª Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
European Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 1830–1841