Corticocortical connections of frontal oculomotor areas in the cat

Nakai, Mitsukazu; Tamai, Yasuhiko; Miyashita, Eizo

doi:10.1016/0006-8993(87)91329-1

Cited by 17 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In cats, previous studies have detected corticospinal neurons in areas 6a␣, 6a␥, and 6iffu (Catsman-Berrevoets and Kuypers, 1981;Hayes and Rustioni, 1981;Nudo and Masterton, 1990;Ghosh, 1997a) and found that electrical stimulation of area 6 evokes forelimb and face (from areas 6a␣ and 6a␥; Delgado and Livingston, 1955;Nieoullon and Rispal-Padel, 1976;Ghosh, 1997a) and eye movements (from areas 6a␤ and 6a␥; Schlag and Schlag-Rey, 1970;Guitton and Mandl, 1978;Nakai et al, 1987). In this study, the ipsilateral cortical connections of the different subdivisions of area 6 were examined to determine differences, if any, in their connections with prefrontal cortex, area 4, and sensory cortex (see Reinoso-Suarez, 1984;Cavada and Reinoso-Suarez, 1985;Olson and Jeffers, 1987).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Ipsilateral cortical connections of area 6 in the cat cerebral cortex

Ghosh

1997

J. Comp. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many motor areas have been identified within cytoarchitectonic area 6 of the cerebral cortex in primates. To provide a better understanding of the motor functions of area 6 in the cat, the ipsilateral cortical connections of the different cytoarchitectonic subdivisions of area 6 (areas 6a alpha, 6a beta, 6a gamma, and 6iffu) were studied by the use of fluorescent retrograde tracers. Tracer injections, made in the forelimb and face regions of areas 6a alpha and 6a gamma, were guided by data from intracortical microstimulation (ICMS). ICMS did not evoke movements from areas 6a beta and 6iffu. Retrogradely labeled neurons were enumerated in cytoarchitectonically identified areas in the frontal and parietal lobes to show that the subdivisions of area 6 are strongly interconnected except for areas 6a gamma and 6a beta. There are considerable differences in the pattern of connections of the area 6 subdivisions with area 4 and with prefrontal, cingulate, and parietal cortices. Area 4 gamma projects strongly to area 6a gamma but not to the other subdivisions. Areas 4 delta, 4fu, and 4sfu project strongly to 6a alpha and 6iffu but relatively weakly to area 6a beta. Prefrontal areas project strongly to area 6a beta and 6iffu, moderately to 6a alpha, but weakly to area 6a gamma. Cingulate areas project strongly to area 6iffu and moderately to areas 6a alpha and 6a beta but do not project to area 6a gamma. Parietal projections from primary and second somatosensory cortex were directed to area 6a gamma, whereas areas 5, 7, and insula were found to project to all the subdivisions of area 6. These findings support earlier suggestions that secondary motor areas may be located in areas 6a alpha and 6a gamma (Ghosh [1997] J. Comp. Neurol. 380:191-214). Features of the pattern of cortical connections of area 6 common to the cat and primates suggest that their motor areas in the frontal lobe are organized in a similar manner.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Ipsilateral cortical connections of area 6 in the cat cerebral cortex

Ghosh

1997

J. Comp. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the medial part of area 6, 6m, contains a number of cytoarchitectonic regions and physiological areas (Nakai et al, 1986;Avendano and Rausell, 1988). Some other cortical areas are known to have subcompartments with different patterns of connections (e.g., Zeki and Shipp, 1991).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(1982). Guildin and Markowitsch (1984), Guildin et al (1986), Heath and Jones (1971), Irle and Markowitsch (1982), Imig and Reale (1980), Ino et al (1990), Powell (1968, 1973), Kawamura (1973a-c), Kawamura and Naito (1980), Krettek and Price (1977a,b), Kuchiiwa et al (1985), Llamas et al (1985), Macchi et al (1978), Maciewicz (1974), McNair and Avendano (1980), Micelli et al (1985), Minciacchetti et al (1987), Morel and Imig (1987), Mori et al (1989), Mucke et al (1982), Olson (1986, 1988a,b), Nakai et al (1986), Norita et al (1986), Olson and Edelstein (1984), Olson and Graybiel (1987). Olson and Jeffers (1987).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These areas are located the medial and lateral walls of the presylvian sulcus and correspond to DLo and VLo (Burton and Kopf, 1984) and to the lateral frontal eye fields (Guitton and Mandle, 1978;Nakai et al, 1986). These two physiologically distinct areas have been considered together because of the relative lack of connectional data.…”

Section: Appendixmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This area consists of regions of area 6 medial to the rostra1 margin of the cruciate sulcus and corresponds to the medial part of 6aB, 6a(u, and 6if Avendano and Rausell, 1988;Musil and Olson, 1991). 6m contains a region, the medial frontal eye field, where electrical stimulation may elicit eye movements (Guitton and Mandle 1978;Jeffers and Olson, 1984;Nakai et al, 1986).…”

Section: Appendixmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analysis of connectivity in the cat cerebral cortex

1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mammalian cerebral cortex is innervated by a large number of corticocortical connections. The number of connections makes it difficult to understand the organization of the cortical network. Nonetheless, conclusions about the organization of cortical systems drawn from examining connectional data have often been made in a speculative and informal manner, unsupported by any analytic treatment. Recently, progress has been made toward more systematic ways of extracting organizing principles from data on the network of connections between cortical areas of the monkey. In this article, we extend these approaches to the cortical systems of the cat. We collated information from the neuroanatomical literature about the corticocortical connections of the cat. This collation incorporated 1139 reported corticocortical connections between 65 cortical areas. We have previously used an optimization technique (Scannell and Young, 1993) to analyze this database in order to represent the connectional organization of cortical systems in the cat. Here, we report the connectional database and analyze it in a number of further ways. First, we employed rules from Felleman and Van Essen (1991) to investigate hierarchical relations among the areas. Second, we compared quantitatively the results of the optimization method with the results of the hierarchical method. Third, we examined quantitatively whether simple connection rules, which may reflect the development and evolution of the cortex, can account for the experimentally identified corticocortical connections in the database. The results showed, first, that hierarchical rules, when applied to the cat visual system, define a largely consistent hierarchy. Second, in both auditory and visual systems, the ordering of areas by hierarchical analysis and by optimization analysis was statistically significantly related. Hence, independent analyzes concur broadly in their ordering of areas in the cortical hierarchies. Third, the majority of corticocortical connections, and much of the pattern of connectivity, were accounted for by a simple “nearest-neighbor-or-next-door-but-one” connection rule, which may suggest one of the mechanisms by which the development of cortical connectivity is controlled.

show abstract

Cytoarchitecture of sensorimotor areas in the cat cerebral cortex

Ghosh

1997

J. Comp. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The organization of multiple motor areas in the cerebral cortex has been investigated frequently in primates but rarely in nonprimate species. To compare sensorimotor areas in cats and primates, the cytoarchitecture of frontal and parietal areas of the cat cerebral cortex was described and mapped from coronal sections stained with cresyl violet or thionine. Multiple subdivisions of areas 4 and 6 were recognized; of these, the cytoarchitecture of area 4 gamma is similar to that of area 4 described in other carnivores and in primates and is characterized by giant pyramidal cells in multiple rows or clusters in lamina V. In other subdivisions of area 4 (4 delta, 4sfu, and 4fu), giant pyramidal cells are few or absent in lamina V, and these subdivisions resemble area 6 of primates. Area 6 of the cat cortex is heterogeneous, and differences in laminar appearance and size of pyramidal cells in lamina V distinguish its four subdivisions (6a alpha, 6a beta, 6a gamma, and 6iffu). The adjoining prefrontal areas are distinguishable from area 6 by the presence of a thin internal granular lamina (lamina IV) and the reduced size of pyramidal cells in lamina V. Laminae are poorly differentiated in the cingulate areas, where a rostral and caudal subdivision can be distinguished on the basis of the absence or presence of lamina IV. Area 3a is characterized by a thin lamina IV and is located between frontal agranular and parietal granular (well-defined lamina IV) fields (3b, 1, 2, 2pri, 5, and 7). Insular cortex can be subdivided into granular and agranular fields.

show abstract

Corticocortical connections of frontal oculomotor areas in the cat

Cited by 17 publications

References 30 publications

Ipsilateral cortical connections of area 6 in the cat cerebral cortex

Ipsilateral cortical connections of area 6 in the cat cerebral cortex

Analysis of connectivity in the cat cerebral cortex

Cytoarchitecture of sensorimotor areas in the cat cerebral cortex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About