1957
DOI: 10.1152/jn.1957.20.4.347
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

MOTOR EFFECTS OF STIMULATION OF CEREBRAL CORTEX OF SQUIRREL MONKEY (SAIMIRI SCIUREUS)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
22
1

Year Published

1964
1964
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
22
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Specifically, in Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata), many neurons of the supplementary motor area (SMA) project to the orofacial region of primary motor cortex [27], while relatively few neurons in the SMA of owl monkeys (Aotus trivirgatus) make these projections [28]. Moreover, compared with the broad region of SMA that can evoke orofacial movements in macaques [29], electrical surface stimulation of the SMA in squirrel monkeys does not evoke orofacial movements [30]. Similarly, intracortical microstimulation of only a small region of SMA in owl monkeys evokes orofacial movement [31].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, in Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata), many neurons of the supplementary motor area (SMA) project to the orofacial region of primary motor cortex [27], while relatively few neurons in the SMA of owl monkeys (Aotus trivirgatus) make these projections [28]. Moreover, compared with the broad region of SMA that can evoke orofacial movements in macaques [29], electrical surface stimulation of the SMA in squirrel monkeys does not evoke orofacial movements [30]. Similarly, intracortical microstimulation of only a small region of SMA in owl monkeys evokes orofacial movement [31].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, electrically evoked motor responses in S1 resemble those evoked in M1, with the exception that stimulation thresholds are greater (Welker et al, 1957;Woolsey, 1958;Doetsch and Gardner, 1972;Sessle and Weisendanger, 1982). In both the results presented here and results reported in electrical stimulation studies of cortex in Didelphis (Lende, 1963c;Beck et al, 1996), movements were most often evoked by using relatively high threshold stimulation; higher than the Ͻ 20 A typically observed in microstimulation studies of M1 of primates (Sessle and Weisendanger, 1982;Stepniewska et al, 1993;Nudo et al, 1992Nudo et al, , 1996.…”
Section: Motor Representationmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…In their study on the distribution of corticocortical neurons projecting to the orofacial region of the MI, they have observed that only a few or no neurons are labeled in the SMA in three cases examined after injection of a retrograde tracer into the orofacial region of the MI. With respect to New World monkeys, Welker et al (1957) have reported that, by using electrical surface stimulation, no orofacial representation is found in the SMA of the squirrel monkey. By using ICMS, Gould et al (1986) reported that, in the SMA of the owl monkey, there may exist only a small area representing the orofacial part.…”
Section: Smamentioning
confidence: 99%