Literature DB >> 24500653

Natural Variation in Skin Thickness Argues for Mechanical Stimulus Control by Force Instead of Displacement.

Yuxiang Wang1, Kara L Marshall2, Yoshichika Baba3, Ellen A Lumpkin, Gregory J Gerling.   

Abstract

The neural response to touch stimuli is influenced by skin properties as well as the delivery of stimuli. Here, we compare stimuli controlled by displacement and force, and analyze the impact on firing rates of slowly adapting type I afferents as skin thickness and elasticity change. Uniaxial compression tests were used to measure the mechanical properties of mouse hind limb skin (n=5), resulting in a range of skin thickness measurements (211.6-530.6 μm) and hyper- and visco-elastic properties (average coefficient of variation=0.27).Values were integrated to an axisymmetric finite element model using an Ogden strain energy function. This calculated the propagation of surface loads to tactile end-organ locations, where maximum compressive stress and its rate were sampled and linearly regressed to firing rate. For the observed range of skin thickness, firing response was predicted under both force and displacement control of a ramp-and-hold stimulus. Over the ramp phase of stimulation, the variance in predicted firing rate was higher under displacement than under force control (22.2versus 4.9 Hz) with a similar trend in the sustained phase of stimulation (4.6versus1.3Hz). Given that skin thickness varies significantly between specimens, for human skin perhaps seven more so than for mice, the use of force control is predicted to decrease experimental variance in neurophysiological and psychophysical responses.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Tactile; biomechanics; compression; finite element analysis; mechanoreceptor; neurophysiology; skin mechanics; somatosensory afferent; touch

Year:  2013        PMID: 24500653      PMCID: PMC3772638          DOI: 10.1109/WHC.2013.6548484

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Haptics Conf


  23 in total

1.  Grating orientation as a measure of tactile spatial acuity.

Authors:  J C Craig
Journal:  Somatosens Mot Res       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.111

Review 2.  Neural coding.

Authors:  K O Johnson
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 17.173

3.  Encoding of direction of fingertip forces by human tactile afferents.

Authors:  I Birznieks; P Jenmalm; A W Goodwin; R S Johansson
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-10-15       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Tactile spatial sensitivity and anisotropy.

Authors:  Gregory O Gibson; James C Craig
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2005-08

5.  Surface deflection of primate fingertip under line load.

Authors:  M A Srinivasan
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Age-related changes in the mechanical properties of human skin.

Authors:  C H Daly; G F Odland
Journal:  J Invest Dermatol       Date:  1979-07       Impact factor: 8.551

7.  Mechanical properties and Young's modulus of human skin in vivo.

Authors:  P G Agache; C Monneur; J L Leveque; J De Rigal
Journal:  Arch Dermatol Res       Date:  1980       Impact factor: 3.017

8.  A continuum mechanical model of mechanoreceptive afferent responses to indented spatial patterns.

Authors:  Arun P Sripati; Sliman J Bensmaia; Kenneth O Johnson
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Force sensor in simulated skin and neural model mimic tactile SAI afferent spiking response to ramp and hold stimuli.

Authors:  Elmer K Kim; Scott A Wellnitz; Sarah M Bourdon; Ellen A Lumpkin; Gregory J Gerling
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2012-07-23       Impact factor: 4.262

10.  Merkel cells are essential for light-touch responses.

Authors:  Stephen M Maricich; Scott A Wellnitz; Aislyn M Nelson; Daine R Lesniak; Gregory J Gerling; Ellen A Lumpkin; Huda Y Zoghbi
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-06-19       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Mechanical systems biology of C. elegans touch sensation.

Authors:  Michael Krieg; Alexander R Dunn; Miriam B Goodman
Journal:  Bioessays       Date:  2015-01-19       Impact factor: 4.345

2.  Hyperelastic Material Properties of Mouse Skin under Compression.

Authors:  Yuxiang Wang; Kara L Marshall; Yoshichika Baba; Gregory J Gerling; Ellen A Lumpkin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-18       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Compressive viscoelasticity of freshly excised mouse skin is dependent on specimen thickness, strain level and rate.

Authors:  Yuxiang Wang; Kara L Marshall; Yoshichika Baba; Ellen A Lumpkin; Gregory J Gerling
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.