4.2 Article

Responses of thoracic spinal interneurons to vestibular stimulation

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 195, 期 1, 页码 89-100

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00221-009-1754-0

关键词

Otolith organ; Vertical semicircular canal; Vestbulo-autonomic responses; Cardiovascular; Respiration; Sympathetic nervous system; Spinal cord

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (USA) [R01-DC03732, P30-DC05205]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vestibular influences on outflow from the spinal cord are largely mediated via spinal interneurons, although few studies have recorded interneuronal activity during labyrinthine stimulation. The present study determined the responses of upper thoracic interneurons of decerebrate cats to electrical stimulation of the vestibular nerve or natural stimulation of otolith organs and the anterior and posterior semicircular canals using rotations in vertical planes. A majority of thoracic interneurons (74/102) responded to vestibular nerve stimulation at median latencies of 6.5 ms (minimum of similar to 3 ms), suggesting that labyrinthine inputs were relayed to these neurons through trisynaptic and longer pathways. Thoracic interneuronal responses to vertical rotations were similar to those of graviceptors such as otolith organs, and a wide array of tilt directions preferentially activated different cells. Such responses were distinct from those of cells in the cervical and lumbar enlargements, which are mainly elicited by ear-down tilts and are synchronous with stimulus position when low rotational frequencies are delivered, but tend to be in phase with stimulus velocity when high frequencies are employed. The dynamic properties of thoracic interneuronal responses to tilts were instead similar to those of thoracic motoneurons and sympathetic preganglionic neurons. However, the preferred tilt directions of the interneurons were more heterogeneous than thoracic spinal outputs, showing that the outputs do not simply reflect an addition of local interneuronal activity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据