4.2 Article

Cortical inactivation by cooling in small animals

期刊

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnsys.2011.00053

关键词

auditory cortex; cooling inactivation; cryoloop; thallium autometallography

资金

  1. MRC [MC_U135097126] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Medical Research Council [MC_U135097126] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reversible inactivation of the cortex by surface cooling is a powerful method for studying the function of a particular area. Implanted cooling cryoloops have been used to study the role of individual cortical areas in auditory processing of awake-behaving cats. Cryoloops have also been used in rodents for reversible inactivation of the cortex, but recently there has been a concern that the cryoloop may also cool non-cortical structures either directly or via the perfusion of blood, cooled as it passed close to the cooling loop. In this study we have confirmed that the loop can inactivate most of the auditory cortex without causing a significant reduction in temperature of the auditory thalamus or other subcortical structures. We placed a cryoloop on the surface of the guinea pig cortex, cooled it to 2 degrees C and measured thermal gradients across the neocortical surface. We found that the temperature dropped to 20-24 degrees C among cells within a radius of about 2.5 mm away from the loop. This temperature drop was sufficient to reduce activity of most cortical cells and led to the inactivation of almost the entire auditory region. When the temperature of thalamus, midbrain, and middle ear were measured directly during cortical cooling, there was a small drop in temperature (about 4 degrees C) but this was not sufficient to directly reduce neural activity. In an effort to visualize the extent of neural inactivation we measured the uptake of thallium ions following an intravenous injection. This confirmed that there was a large reduction of activity across much of the ipsilateral cortex and only a small reduction in subcortical structures.

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