Literature DB >> 3828047

Deafferentation does not disrupt natural rules of action syntax.

K C Berridge, J C Fentress.   

Abstract

Natural rules of action syntax control the sequential order of grooming and ingestive/aversive actions emitted by rats. Grooming and ingestive actions share a common feature in that all are performed with or directed towards the mouth, tongue, and face. This study examined the role of orofacial somatosensory cues and feedback in the generation of natural action syntax. Bilateral deafferentation of the mandibular and maxillary branches of the trigeminal nerve was used to eliminate tactile sensation from the rostral face and mouth while preserving motor function. Neither the overall degree of sequential stereotypy (H) of grooming or ingestive sequences, nor the generation of particular natural sequencing rules were affected by trigeminal deafferentation. These natural rules appear to be specified by the brain without need of somatosensory feedback.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3828047     DOI: 10.1016/0166-4328(87)90243-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Brain Res        ISSN: 0166-4328            Impact factor:   3.332


  10 in total

1.  Tactile responses in the granule cell layer of cerebellar folium crus IIa of freely behaving rats.

Authors:  M J Hartmann; J M Bower
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-05-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Cortex, striatum and cerebellum: control of serial order in a grooming sequence.

Authors:  K C Berridge; I Q Whishaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Social context rapidly modulates the influence of auditory feedback on avian vocal motor control.

Authors:  Jon T Sakata; Michael S Brainard
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-08-19       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Non-invasive neuromodulation using rTMS and the electromagnetic-perceptive gene (EPG) facilitates plasticity after nerve injury.

Authors:  Carolina Cywiak; Ryan C Ashbaugh; Abigael C Metto; Lalita Udpa; Chunqi Qian; Assaf A Gilad; Mark Reimers; Ming Zhong; Galit Pelled
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 8.955

5.  Single unit and population responses during inhibitory gating of striatal activity in freely moving rats.

Authors:  H C Cromwell; A Klein; R P Mears
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2007-02-22       Impact factor: 3.590

6.  Self-directed orofacial grooming promotes social attraction in mice via chemosensory communication.

Authors:  Yun-Feng Zhang; Emma Janke; Janardhan P Bhattarai; Daniel W Wesson; Minghong Ma
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2022-04-22

7.  Behavioral consequences of bone marrow transplantation in the treatment of murine mucopolysaccharidosis type VII.

Authors:  L Bastedo; M S Sands; D T Lambert; M A Pisa; E Birkenmeier; P L Chang
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 14.808

8.  Neurological dysfunction expressed in the grooming behavior of developing weaver mutant mice.

Authors:  E M Coscia; J C Fentress
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 2.805

9.  Spontaneous behavioral responses in the orofacial region: a model of trigeminal pain in mouse.

Authors:  Marcela Romero-Reyes; Simon Akerman; Elaine Nguyen; Alice Vijjeswarapu; Betty Hom; Hong-Wei Dong; Andrew C Charles
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 5.887

10.  The D1 family dopamine receptor, DopR, potentiates hind leg grooming behavior in Drosophila.

Authors:  E Pitmon; G Stephens; S J Parkhurst; F W Wolf; G Kehne; M Taylor; T Lebestky
Journal:  Genes Brain Behav       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 3.449

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.