4.6 Review

Cytochrome oxidase blobs: a call for more anatomy

期刊

BRAIN STRUCTURE & FUNCTION
卷 226, 期 9, 页码 2793-2806

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00429-021-02360-2

关键词

Layer 1; Primary visual cortex; Pyramidal cells; Dendritic minicolumns; Modularity; Zinc

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [R01 MH113257] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ordered relation of structure and function in understanding brain organization is complex, with the cytochrome oxidase (CO) blobs in the macaque monkey visual cortex demonstrating compartment-specific connectivity and response properties. However, the finer anatomical organization and functional implications of this system remain unclear and require further investigation.
An ordered relation of structure and function has been a cornerstone in thinking about brain organization. Like the brain itself, however, this is not straightforward and is confounded both by functional intricacy and structural plasticity (many routes to a given outcome). As a striking case of putative structure-function correlation, this mini-review focuses on the relatively well-characterized pattern of cytochrome oxidase (CO) blobs (aka patches or puffs) in the supragranular layers of macaque monkey visual cortex. The pattern is without doubt visually compelling, and the semi-dichotomous array of CO+ blobs and CO- interblobs is consistent with multiple studies reporting compartment-specific preferential connectivity and distinctive physiological response properties. Nevertheless, as briefly reviewed here, the finer anatomical organization of this system is surprisingly under-investigated, and the relation to functional aspects, therefore, unclear. Microcircuitry, cell type, and three-dimensional spatiotemporal level investigations of the CO+CO- pattern are needed and may open new views to structure-function organization of visual cortex, and to phylogenetic and ontogenetic comparisons across nonhuman primates (NHP), and between NHP and humans. [GRAPHICS] .

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

4.6
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