Somatoiopic studies on cerebellar fastigial cells

Eccles, John C.; Rantucci, T.; Sabah, Nassir H.; Táboríková, H

doi:10.1007/bf00233397

Cited by 31 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Information from neck proprioceptors is sent to the vestibular nuclei (VN) via monosynaptic excitatory connections between the central cervical nucleus (CCN) and contralateral VN (Sato et al 1997) as well as by means of direct projections from the cerebellum (Akaike 1983; Eccles et al 1974; Furuya et al 1975; Noda et al 1990; Robinson et al 1994). Previous studies in decerebrate cats (Kasper et al 1988; lateral and descending vestibular nuclei) as well as in alert squirrel monkeys (Gdowski and McCrea 2000) have shown that a significant number of neurons in the vestibular nuclei are modulated in response to neck (BUH) stimulation (50 vs. 78%, respectively).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different neural strategies for multimodal integration: comparison of two macaque monkey species

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The integration of neck proprioceptive and vestibular inputs underlies the generation of accurate postural and motor control. Recent studies have shown that central mechanisms underlying the integration of these sensory inputs differ across species. Notably, in rhesus monkey (macaca mulata), an Old World monkey, neurons in the vestibular nuclei are insensitive to passive stimulation of neck proprioceptors. In contrast, in squirrel monkey, a New World monkey, stimulation produces robust modulation. This has led to the suggestion that there are differences in how sensory information is integrated during self motion in old versus New World monkeys. To test this hypothesis, we recorded from neurons in the vestibular nuclei of another species in the macaca genus (i.e., macaca fascicularis (cynomolgus monkey)). Recordings were made from vestibular-only (VO) and position-vestibular-pause (PVP) neurons. The majority (53%) of neurons in both groups were sensitive to neck proprioceptive and vestibular stimulation during passive body-under-head and whole body rotation, respectively. Furthermore, responses during passive rotations of the head-on-body were well predicted by the linear summation of vestibular and neck responses (which were typically antagonistic). During active head movement, the responses of VO and PVP neurons were further attenuated (relative to a model based on linear summation) for the duration of the active head movement or gaze shift, respectively. Taken together, our findings show that the brain's strategy for the central processing of sensory information can vary even within a single genus. We suggest that similar divergence may be observed in other areas in which multimodal integration occurs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different neural strategies for multimodal integration: comparison of two macaque monkey species

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evidence for a role for rebound firing in shaping the ON response comes from Llinás and Muhlethaler (1988), showing that the duration of the ON response is significantly longer than that of the IO mediated EPSP and that strong phasic firing occurs following hyperpolarizing current injection. On the other hand, rebound firing has been questioned in vivo (Alvina et al, 2008) and there exists evidence for direct IO-DCN excitation (Eccles et al, 1974a,b; Rowland and Jaeger, 2005). The physiological conditions under which rebound firing manifests itself and the degree to which direct IO excitation can drive DCN neurons remain to be elucidated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The firing patterns observed in DCN in vivo suggest that the properties of the different afferent inputs and the biophysics of DCN neurons interact in complex ways to form the DCN output. Evidence exists for the involvement of all afferent structures in shaping DCN output (Thach, 1968; Eccles et al, 1974a,b; Strick, 1983; Rowland and Jaeger, 2005, 2008; Ohyama et al, 2006). The contribution of PCs to DCN firing is particularly interesting because PCs participate in the feedback loops involving both excitatory cerebellar afferents.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implications of functional anatomy on information processing in the deep cerebellar nuclei

Baumel

2009

Front. Cell. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cerebellum has been implicated as a major player in producing temporal acuity. Theories of cerebellar timing typically emphasize the role of the cerebellar cortex while overlooking the role of the deep cerebellar nuclei (DCN) that provide the sole output of the cerebellum. Here we review anatomical and electrophysiological studies to shed light on the DCN's ability to support temporal pattern generation in the cerebellum. Specifically, we examine data on the structure of the DCN, the biophysical properties of DCN neurons and properties of the afferent systems to evaluate their contribution to DCN firing patterns. In addition, we manipulate one of the afferent structures, the inferior olive (IO), using systemic harmaline injection to test for a network effect on activity of single DCN neurons in freely moving animals. Harmaline induces a rhythmic firing pattern of short bursts on a quiescent background at about 8 Hz. Other neurons become quiescent for long periods (seconds to minutes). The observed patterns indicate that the major effect harmaline exerts on the DCN is carried indirectly by the inhibitory Purkinje cells (PCs) activated by the IO, rather than by direct olivary excitation. Moreover, we suggest that the DCN response profile is determined primarily by the number of concurrently active PCs, their firing rate and the level of synchrony occurring in their transitions between continuous firing and quiescence. We argue that DCN neurons faithfully transfer temporal patterns resulting from strong correlations in PCs state transitions, while largely ignoring the timing of simple spikes from individual PCs. Future research should aim at quantifying the contribution of PC state transitions to DCN activity, and the interplay between the different afferent systems that drive DCN activity.

show abstract

“…Second, the rFN is a principle outflow nucleus of the cerebellar vermis, and neurons in the vermal regions of the anterior and posterior cerebellum are responsive to hindlimb movement (Oscarsson 1969; Gray et al 1993). Furthermore, the activity of rFN neurons is modulated during mechanical manipulations of the hindlimb (toe taps and pressure to foot pads) and electrical stimulation of hindlimb nerves (Eccles et al 1974a; Eccles et al 1974b; Wilson et al 1978). Third, rFN neuronal activity is modulated by vestibular afferent activation (Ghelarducci 1973; Ghelarducci et al 1974; Stanojevic et al 1980; Stanojevic 1981; Siebold et al 1997; Shaikh et al 2005; Miller et al 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hindlimb movement modulates the activity of rostral fastigial nucleus neurons that process vestibular input

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integration of vestibular and proprioceptive afferent information within the central nervous system is a critical component of postural regulation. We recently demonstrated that labyrinthine and hindlimb signals converge onto vestibular nucleus neurons, such that hindlimb movement modulates the activity of these cells. However, it is unclear whether similar convergence of hindlimb and vestibular signals also occurs upstream from the vestibular nuclei, particularly in the rostral fastigial nucleus (rFN). We tested the hypothesis that rFN neurons have similar responses to hindlimb movement as vestibular nucleus neurons. Recordings were obtained from 53 rFN neurons that responded to hindlimb movement in decerebrate cats. In contrast to vestibular nucleus neurons, which commonly encoded the direction of hindlimb movement (81% of neurons), few rFN neurons (21%) that responded to leg movement encoded such information. Instead, most rFN neurons responded to both limb flexion and extension. Half of the rFN neurons whose activity was modulated by hindlimb movement received convergent vestibular inputs. These results show that rFN neurons receive somatosensory inputs from the hindlimb, and that a subset of rFN neurons integrates vestibular and hindlimb signals. Such rFN neurons likely perform computations that participate in maintenance of balance during upright stance and movement. Although vestibular nucleus neurons are interconnected with the rFN, the dissimilarity of responses of neurons sensitive to hindlimb movement in the two regions suggest that they play different roles in coordinating postural responses during locomotion and other movements which entail changes in limb position.

show abstract

Somatoiopic studies on cerebellar fastigial cells

Cited by 31 publications

References 29 publications

Different neural strategies for multimodal integration: comparison of two macaque monkey species

Different neural strategies for multimodal integration: comparison of two macaque monkey species

Implications of functional anatomy on information processing in the deep cerebellar nuclei

Hindlimb movement modulates the activity of rostral fastigial nucleus neurons that process vestibular input

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About