4.8 Article

Cellular organization of cortical barrel columns is whisker-specific

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1312691110

Keywords

soma counts; NeuN; GAD67; VPM; barrel cortex

Funding

  1. Anatomy Institute of the University of Tubingen
  2. Max Planck Florida Institute for Neuroscience
  3. Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes
  4. Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience
  5. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research Grant BMBF/FKZ [01GQ1002]
  6. Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics
  7. Werner Reichardt Center for Integrative Neuroscience
  8. Max Planck Institute of Neurobiology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The cellular organization of the cortex is of fundamental importance for elucidating the structural principles that underlie its functions. It has been suggested that reconstructing the structure and synaptic wiring of the elementary functional building block of mammalian cortices, the cortical column, might suffice to reverse engineer and simulate the functions of entire cortices. In the vibrissal area of rodent somatosensory cortex, whisker-related barrel columns have been referred to as potential cytoarchitectonic equivalents of functional cortical columns. Here, we investigated the structural stereotypy of cortical barrel columns by measuring the 3D neuronal composition of the entire vibrissal area in rat somatosensory cortex and thalamus. We found that the number of neurons per cortical barrel column and thalamic barreloid varied substantially within individual animals, increasing by similar to 2.5-fold from dorsal to ventral whiskers. As a result, the ratio between whisker-specific thalamic and cortical neurons was remarkably constant. Thus, we hypothesize that the cellular architecture of sensory cortices reflects the degree of similarity in sensory input and not columnar and/or cortical uniformity principles.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available