Afferent Impulses of the Trigeminal Nerve

Some anatomical and electrophysiological properties of tooth‐pulp afferents in the cat.

“…The results also indicate that the two groups of afferents differ in their conduction velocities, the non-bifurcating fibres tending to be slower. This is in agreement with the histological studies where it was found that most of the finer diameter fibres did not bifurcate (Gerard, 1923;Windle, 1926;Astrbm, 1953). The functional significance of the fact that some nerves convey the same information to more than one part of the trigeminal nuclear complex is not clear.…”

“…The present experiments have shown that some pulpal afferents project to both the main sensory nucleus and the nucleus caudalis and so provide the first electrophysiological confirmation of the histological evidence for bifurcating trigeminal afferent nerves (Cajal, 1909;Gerard, 1923;Windle, 1926;Astr6m, 1953). The results also indicate that the two groups of afferents differ in their conduction velocities, the non-bifurcating fibres tending to be slower.…”

Some anatomical and electrophysiological properties of tooth‐pulp afferents in the cat.

“…The results also indicate that the two groups of afferents differ in their conduction velocities, the non-bifurcating fibres tending to be slower. This is in agreement with the histological studies where it was found that most of the finer diameter fibres did not bifurcate (Gerard, 1923;Windle, 1926;Astrbm, 1953). The functional significance of the fact that some nerves convey the same information to more than one part of the trigeminal nuclear complex is not clear.…”

“…The present experiments have shown that some pulpal afferents project to both the main sensory nucleus and the nucleus caudalis and so provide the first electrophysiological confirmation of the histological evidence for bifurcating trigeminal afferent nerves (Cajal, 1909;Gerard, 1923;Windle, 1926;Astr6m, 1953). The results also indicate that the two groups of afferents differ in their conduction velocities, the non-bifurcating fibres tending to be slower.…”

Occlusion of the Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery

“…Complete tactile preservation over the body indicates that the median fillet was intact. Complete tactile preservation over the face, except in the one instance of slight impairment on the affected side, coincides with the conclusions of Spiller, 18 Gerard,22 Stopford 20 and others that tactile impulses from the face do not pass with pain and temperature fibers into the descending root of the fifth nerve, but proceed to the chief sensory nucleus in the pons. Windle,23 however, in an experimental examination of the sensory root of the trigeminal nerve in the mouse and pig, concluded that probably there was a pathway for tactile impulses to the descending as well as to the main sensory nucleus by way of fibers sending bifurcating branches to both.…”

Organization of the spinal trigeminal nucleus in star‐nosed moles

“…Primary somatosensory axons from the face project to both the STN and the PrV. Thick axons, which are presumably from mechanoreceptor afferents, project to the PrV and to all subnuclei in the STN, whereas thin axons, which are presumably nociceptive and/or thermoceptive, project only to the STN (Ramon y Cajal, ; Gerard, ; Anstrom, ; Jacquin et al, ). Four parallel somatosensory pathways arise from the four trigeminal somatosensory (sub)nuclei, suggesting that each pathway channels information for different facets of touch (Henderson, ; Diamond et al, ).…”

Some anatomical and electrophysiological properties of tooth‐pulp afferents in the cat.

“…The results also indicate that the two groups of afferents differ in their conduction velocities, the non-bifurcating fibres tending to be slower. This is in agreement with the histological studies where it was found that most of the finer diameter fibres did not bifurcate (Gerard, 1923;Windle, 1926;Astrbm, 1953). The functional significance of the fact that some nerves convey the same information to more than one part of the trigeminal nuclear complex is not clear.…”

“…The present experiments have shown that some pulpal afferents project to both the main sensory nucleus and the nucleus caudalis and so provide the first electrophysiological confirmation of the histological evidence for bifurcating trigeminal afferent nerves (Cajal, 1909;Gerard, 1923;Windle, 1926;Astr6m, 1953). The results also indicate that the two groups of afferents differ in their conduction velocities, the non-bifurcating fibres tending to be slower.…”

Occlusion of the Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery

“…Complete tactile preservation over the body indicates that the median fillet was intact. Complete tactile preservation over the face, except in the one instance of slight impairment on the affected side, coincides with the conclusions of Spiller, 18 Gerard,22 Stopford 20 and others that tactile impulses from the face do not pass with pain and temperature fibers into the descending root of the fifth nerve, but proceed to the chief sensory nucleus in the pons. Windle,23 however, in an experimental examination of the sensory root of the trigeminal nerve in the mouse and pig, concluded that probably there was a pathway for tactile impulses to the descending as well as to the main sensory nucleus by way of fibers sending bifurcating branches to both.…”

Organization of the spinal trigeminal nucleus in star‐nosed moles

“…Primary somatosensory axons from the face project to both the STN and the PrV. Thick axons, which are presumably from mechanoreceptor afferents, project to the PrV and to all subnuclei in the STN, whereas thin axons, which are presumably nociceptive and/or thermoceptive, project only to the STN (Ramon y Cajal, ; Gerard, ; Anstrom, ; Jacquin et al, ). Four parallel somatosensory pathways arise from the four trigeminal somatosensory (sub)nuclei, suggesting that each pathway channels information for different facets of touch (Henderson, ; Diamond et al, ).…”

Some anatomical and electrophysiological properties of tooth‐pulp afferents in the cat.

“…The results also indicate that the two groups of afferents differ in their conduction velocities, the non-bifurcating fibres tending to be slower. This is in agreement with the histological studies where it was found that most of the finer diameter fibres did not bifurcate (Gerard, 1923;Windle, 1926;Astrbm, 1953). The functional significance of the fact that some nerves convey the same information to more than one part of the trigeminal nuclear complex is not clear.…”

“…The present experiments have shown that some pulpal afferents project to both the main sensory nucleus and the nucleus caudalis and so provide the first electrophysiological confirmation of the histological evidence for bifurcating trigeminal afferent nerves (Cajal, 1909;Gerard, 1923;Windle, 1926;Astr6m, 1953). The results also indicate that the two groups of afferents differ in their conduction velocities, the non-bifurcating fibres tending to be slower.…”

Occlusion of the Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery

“…Complete tactile preservation over the body indicates that the median fillet was intact. Complete tactile preservation over the face, except in the one instance of slight impairment on the affected side, coincides with the conclusions of Spiller, 18 Gerard,22 Stopford 20 and others that tactile impulses from the face do not pass with pain and temperature fibers into the descending root of the fifth nerve, but proceed to the chief sensory nucleus in the pons. Windle,23 however, in an experimental examination of the sensory root of the trigeminal nerve in the mouse and pig, concluded that probably there was a pathway for tactile impulses to the descending as well as to the main sensory nucleus by way of fibers sending bifurcating branches to both.…”

Organization of the spinal trigeminal nucleus in star‐nosed moles

“…Primary somatosensory axons from the face project to both the STN and the PrV. Thick axons, which are presumably from mechanoreceptor afferents, project to the PrV and to all subnuclei in the STN, whereas thin axons, which are presumably nociceptive and/or thermoceptive, project only to the STN (Ramon y Cajal, ; Gerard, ; Anstrom, ; Jacquin et al, ). Four parallel somatosensory pathways arise from the four trigeminal somatosensory (sub)nuclei, suggesting that each pathway channels information for different facets of touch (Henderson, ; Diamond et al, ).…”