Literature DB >> 20228861

Another angle on rat somatosensory thalamic barreloids.

Kathleen S Rockland1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 20228861      PMCID: PMC2751625          DOI: 10.3389/neuro.01.022.2009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Neurosci        ISSN: 1662-453X            Impact factor:   4.677


× No keyword cloud information.
The rodent barrel cortex is one of the premier model systems for investigating sensory organization and cortical microcircuitry. In no small degree, this is because the cortical barrels, thalamic barreloids, and brainstem barrelettes can be easily visualized and referenced both to each other and to the peripheral whisker field. The report by Haidarliu et al. (2008) concerns a relatively simple, reproducible method for visualizing two thalamic subdivisions and the border between them. The subdivisions in question are the ventrolateral (vl) and dorsomedial (dm) subdivisions of the rat ventral posteromedial (VPM) thalamic nucleus. These are two specialized vibrissa-representing compartments with distinct ascending inputs, associated with extralemniscal (VPMvl) or lemniscal (VPMdm) afferent pathways. The compartments have different output targets, and distinct response properties, related to whisker contact signals (VPMvl) and complex whisking-touch signals (VPMdm). On this basis, they have been supposed to work as parallel thalamic pathways for whisking and touch (Yu et al., 2006). A third distinguishable pathway has been reported through the dorsal part of the barreloids (Urbain and Deschenes, 2007). In this and previous work, the authors have developed an unconventional, tilted oblique plane of section, where the shape of the two subdivisions and the border between them, although otherwise indistinct, become obvious. In this report in particular, the authors modify their original method (Yu et al., 2006) in order to allow translation of coordinates from the oblique to the coronal planes. This is a relatively simple step, at least in retrospect. As with the barrel system as a whole, however, the ability to clearly and reproducibly visualize these structures has significant practical implications. Clearly, definite identification of structure is a necessary condition for interpreting physiological recordings in the thalamus (e.g., Yu et al., 2006). These data in turn are basic to determining whether the subdivisions are primarily specialized for submodality segregation (Alloway, 2008) or for some other processing strategies; for example, the special requirements arising from the operation of a mobile sensory organ and the processing of vibrissal information during active whisking (Ahissar, 2008; Urbain and Deschenes, 2007). The methodology for transforming coordinates and the standardization of nuclear boundaries also augments brain atlases. Atlases are now part of the modern toolkit, with the potential for enabling developmental and comparative research, including at the molecular level; but this requires the highest level of precise details and interdisciplinary transpositions. I would like to interpose two general comments inspired by this article. First, it is remarkable that basic neural structures are still being discovered at the macroscopic level. This stands as a salutary lesson about how much, even at a basic level, remains unknown. Second, although I have emphasized the importance of visualization, it is worth remembering that images can be deceptive: experimenter reading-in happens, often inadvertently. Almost all images carry interpretation, and the interpretation can err. Of many examples that “looks alone are deceptive,” Rokni et al. (2008) present evidence that cerebellar parallel fibers, a preeminently beamlike structure, actually activate Purkinje cells in a patchlike fashion. It remains for further investigations in the barrel system to establish whether these distinct thalamic compartments are functionally distinct or interactive. This should be significantly expedited by the current generation of experiments in alert animals, which can more directly address questions of active sensory perception and the interactions of motor-control and sensation (Ahissar, 2008; Brecht, 2007; Petersen, 2007). Over the longer term, one can realistically hope for a rigorous and enlightening comparison of processing mechanisms in the rodent barrel system with that of other specialized systems, such as the primate visual (Nassi and Callaway, 2009).
  9 in total

1.  A new thalamic pathway of vibrissal information modulated by the motor cortex.

Authors:  Nadia Urbain; Martin Deschênes
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 2.  The functional organization of the barrel cortex.

Authors:  Carl C H Petersen
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 3.  Barrel cortex and whisker-mediated behaviors.

Authors:  Michael Brecht
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 6.627

Review 4.  Information processing streams in rodent barrel cortex: the differential functions of barrel and septal circuits.

Authors:  Kevin D Alloway
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2007-08-16       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  And motion changes it all.

Authors:  Ehud Ahissar
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 24.884

Review 6.  Parallel processing strategies of the primate visual system.

Authors:  Jonathan J Nassi; Edward M Callaway
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2009-04-08       Impact factor: 34.870

7.  Parallel thalamic pathways for whisking and touch signals in the rat.

Authors:  Chunxiu Yu; Dori Derdikman; Sebastian Haidarliu; Ehud Ahissar
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2006-04-18       Impact factor: 8.029

8.  The Morpho/Functional Discrepancy in the Cerebellar Cortex: Looks Alone are Deceptive.

Authors:  Dan Rokni; Rodolfo Llinas; Yosef Yarom
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 4.677

9.  Lemniscal and Extralemniscal Compartments in the VPM of the Rat.

Authors:  Sebastian Haidarliu; Chunxiu Yu; Naama Rubin; Ehud Ahissar
Journal:  Front Neuroanat       Date:  2008-09-12       Impact factor: 3.856

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.