Monkey cutaneous SAI and RA responses to raised and depressed scanned patterns: effects of width, height, orientation, and a raised surround.

Monkey cutaneous SAI and RA responses to raised and depressed scanned patterns: effects of width, height, orientation, and a raised surround. J. Neurophysiol. 78: 2503-2517, 1997. The aim of this study was to examine the slowly adapting type I (SAI) and rapidly adapting (RA) primary afferent representation of raised and depressed surface features. Isolated, raised, and depressed squares and small raised squares with a circular surround were scanned across the receptive fields of SAI and RA mechanoreceptive afferents innervating the distal fingerpads of the rhesus monkey. Pattern height ranged from -620 to +620 micron and width ranged from 0.2 to 7.0 mm. The surround radii ranged from 3.0 to 7.0 mm. Previous combined psychophysical and neurophysiological studies have provided evidence that SAI afferent responses are responsible for the perception of spatial form and texture and that RA afferents are responsible for the detection of stimuli that produce minute skin motion (flutter, slip, microgeometric surface features). Our results strengthen these hypotheses. Response properties shared by both SAI and RA afferent types were that both responded only to the edges of the larger raised and depressed patterns, both responded to falling edges half as vigorously as to rising edges, both responded to rising and falling edges with impulse rates that were proportional to the sine of the angle between the edge and the scanning direction, and both had suppressed responses to a small raised surface feature when a raised surround was closer than 6 mm. Response differences consistent with the hypothesis that SAI afferents are specialized for the representation of form were that SAI responses were confined to areas around the features that evoked them in areas that were 40-50% smaller than the comparable RA response areas, SAI responses were more than four times more sensitive to stimulus height than were RA afferents over the range from 280 to 620 micron, and SAI (but not RA) afferents responded 20-50% more vigorously to corners than to edges. Response differences consistent with the hypothesis that RA afferents are specialized for the detection of minute surfaces features were that only RA afferents responded to very small surface depressions, depressed squares 0.8 mm wide, that were detectable by palpation. Mechanisms underlying the many differences in SAI and RA response properties are discussed.

[1]  V. Mountcastle,et al.  Detection thresholds for stimuli in humans and monkeys: comparison with threshold events in mechanoreceptive afferent nerve fibers innervating the monkey hand. , 1972, Journal of neurophysiology.

[2]  Kenneth O. Johnson,et al.  A rotating drum stimulator for scanning embossed patterns and textures across the skin , 1988, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[3]  K O Johnson,et al.  Neural mechanisms of spatial tactile discrimination: neural patterns evoked by braille‐like dot patterns in the monkey. , 1981, The Journal of physiology.

[4]  K. O. Johnson,et al.  Human tactile pattern recognition: active versus passive touch, velocity effects, and patterns of confusion. , 1991, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  I. Darian‐Smith,et al.  Innervation density of mechanoreceptive fibres supplying glabrous skin of the monkey's index finger. , 1980, The Journal of physiology.

[6]  Charles J. Vierck Comparisons of punctate, edge and surface stimulation of peripheral, slowly-adapting, cutaneous, afferent units of cats , 1979, Brain Research.

[7]  M. Knibestöl Stimulus—response functions of rapidly adapting mechanoreceptors in the human glabrous skin area , 1973, The Journal of physiology.

[8]  R. Johansson,et al.  Sensitivity to edges of mechanoreceptive afferent units innervating the glabrous skin of the human hand , 1982, Brain Research.

[9]  A. Goodwin,et al.  Representation of curved surfaces in responses of mechanoreceptive afferent fibers innervating the monkey's fingerpad , 1995, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[10]  Kenneth O. Johnson,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Tactual form and Texture Perception , 1992 .

[11]  L. Pubols,et al.  Coding of mechanical stimulus velocity and indentation depth by squirrel monkey and raccoon glabrous skin mechanoreceptors. , 1976, Journal of neurophysiology.

[12]  D. Hilbert,et al.  Geometry and the Imagination , 1953 .

[13]  J. Loomis On the tangibility of letters and braille , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  M. Srinivasan Surface deflection of primate fingertip under line load. , 1989, Journal of biomechanics.

[15]  M. Srinivasan,et al.  Tactile discrimination of shape: responses of rapidly adapting mechanoreceptive afferents to a step stroked across the monkey fingerpad , 1987, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[16]  E P Gardner,et al.  Simulation of motion on the skin. III. Mechanisms used by rapidly adapting cutaneous mechanoreceptors in the primate hand for spatiotemporal resolution and two-point discrimination. , 1990, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  M. Srinivasan,et al.  Tactile discrimination of shape: responses of slowly and rapidly adapting mechanoreceptive afferents to a step indented into the monkey fingerpad , 1987, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[18]  K. O. Johnson,et al.  Tactile spatial resolution. III. A continuum mechanics model of skin predicting mechanoreceptor responses to bars, edges, and gratings. , 1981, Journal of neurophysiology.

[19]  Emerson Foulke,et al.  Tactile acuity, aging, and braille reading in long-term blindness , 1996 .

[20]  Ternary Structures ON REPRESENTATION OF , 1995 .

[21]  K. O. Johnson,et al.  Tactile spatial resolution. II. Neural representation of Bars, edges, and gratings in monkey primary afferents. , 1981, Journal of neurophysiology.

[22]  R H LaMotte,et al.  Tactile detection of a dot on a smooth surface: peripheral neural events. , 1986, Journal of neurophysiology.

[23]  J. Phillips,et al.  Responses of human mechanoreceptive afferents to embossed dot arrays scanned across fingerpad skin , 1992, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[24]  Mandayam A. Srinivasan,et al.  Encoding of Shape in the Responses of Cutaneous Mechanoreceptors , 1991 .

[25]  V. Mountcastle,et al.  The sense of flutter-vibration: comparison of the human capacity with response patterns of mechanoreceptive afferents from the monkey hand. , 1968, Journal of neurophysiology.

[26]  On- versus off-responses of raccoon glabrous skin rapidly adapting cutaneous mechanoreceptors. , 1980, Journal of neurophysiology.

[27]  M. Srinivasan,et al.  Tactile detection of slip: surface microgeometry and peripheral neural codes. , 1990, Journal of neurophysiology.