4.3 Article

Stimulus frequency dependence of the linear relationship between local cerebral blood flow and field potential evoked by activation of rat somatosensory cortex

Journal

NEUROSCIENCE RESEARCH
Volume 48, Issue 2, Pages 147-153

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neures.2003.10.014

Keywords

cerebral blood flow; laser-doppler flowmetry; field potential; somatosensory cortex; stimulus frequency; rat

Categories

Funding

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [MH 57180] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigated the relationship between evoked local cerebral blood flow (LCBF) and the field potential induced by somatosensory activation. The specific aim of the present study was to examine the correlation between variations of evoked LCBF and field potential when the stimulus duration was changed, and the dependency of the correlation on stimulus frequency. Evoked LCBF was measured using laser-Doppler flowmetry and the field potential was observed using a tungsten electrode inserted into the cortex alpha-chloralose-anesthetized rats. The cortex was activated by electrical stimulation of the hind paw with a 1.5 mA pulse (0.1 ms) applied at frequencies of 0.5, 1, 5 and 10 Hz for durations of 2, 5, 8, 10 or 15 s. We extended our previous finding [Neurosci. Res. 40 (2001) 281-290], that both the magnitude of evoked LCBF (integrated LCBF) and the summed field potential (SigmaFP) exhibited a maximum at a stimulus frequency of 5 Hz to five different stimulus durations. Moreover, although variations of integrated LCBF and SigmaFP induced by changes in the stimulus duration were linearly correlated, the slope of the regression line depended on the stimulus frequency. This stimulus frequency dependence of the integrated LCBF-SigmaFP linear relationship may be because the vessel response is frequency dependent. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ireland Ltd and The Japan Neuroscience Society. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available