4.6 Article

Determinants of rebound burst responses in rat cerebellar nuclear neurons to physiological stimuli

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
卷 594, 期 4, 页码 985-1003

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1113/JP271894

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
  2. Queen Elizabeth II award
  3. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research
  4. Alberta Innovates Health Solutions
  5. T. Chen Fong award
  6. Killam Foundation
  7. CIHR-CGS PhD studentship
  8. CIHR Postdoctoral Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The end result of signal processing in cerebellar cortex is encoded in the output of Purkinje cells that project inhibitory input to deep cerebellar nuclear (DCN) neurons. DCN cells can respond to a period of inhibition in vitro with a rebound burst of firing, yet the optimal physiological pattern of Purkinje cell input that might evoke a rebound burst is unknown. The current study used spike trains recorded from rat Purkinje cells in response to perioral stimuli in vivo to create a physiological pattern to stimulate Purkinje cell axons in vitro. The perioral stimulus-evoked Purkinje cell firing pattern proved to be virtually ineffective in evoking a rebound burst despite the ability to reliably evoke rebounds using a traditional brief 100Hz stimulus. Similarly, neither complex spike firing nor Purkinje cell patterns identified by CV2 analysis were reliably associated with rebound bursts. Reverse correlation revealed that the optimal Purkinje cell input to evoke a rebound burst was a sequential increase in mean firing rate of at least 30Hz above baseline over 250ms followed by a reduction of 40-60Hz below baseline for up to 500ms. The most important factor was the duration of a pause in Purkinje cell firing that allowed DCN cells to recover from a state of net inhibitory influence. These data indicate that physiological patterns of Purkinje cell firing can elicit rebound bursts in DCN cells in vitro, with pauses in Purkinje cell firing rate acting as a key stimulus for DCN cell rebound responses.

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