Spatial gradients and inhibitory summation in the rat whisker barrel system.

1. Extracellular single-unit recordings and controlled whisker stimuli were used to compare response properties of cells in the barreloids of the ventral posterior medial nucleus of the thalamus and the barrels in the rat primary somatosensory cortex. Whiskers were deflected alone or in combinations involving up to four immediately adjacent whiskers to assess their relative inhibitory and excitatory contributions to individual receptive fields. Quantitative data were obtained from 51 thalamocortical units (TCUs), 79 "regular-spiking" barrel neurons (RSUs), and 5 "fast-spiking" barrel neurons (FSUs) in 28 normal female adult rats. 2. A random-noise generator was used to produce small, continuously varying whisker movements that were applied to one to four adjacent whiskers while the principal (columnar) whisker was displaced with the use of a ramp-and-hold deflection. RSUs displayed adjacent whisker-evoked inhibition that increased as the number of adjacent whiskers stimulated was incremented. Asymptotic levels of inhibition were reached with the application of the noise stimulus to two or three adjacent whiskers depending on which particular combinations were deflected. By contrast, TCUs and FSUs showed weak, or no, surround inhibition. 3. As the number of adjacent whiskers stimulated increased, the background (prestimulus) activity in TCUs and FSUs increased, whereas displayed background activity in RSUs was relatively unaffected. The increase in background activity observed in the FSUs is hypothesized to mediate adjacent whisker-evoked inhibition in the RSUs. 4. A spatial gradient of adjacent whisker inhibition was observed in RSUs. The caudally adjacent whisker evoked more inhibition than the rostrally adjacent whisker, and the ventral more than the dorsal. A cortical origin for the gradient is suggested by the finding that TCUs did not show a spatial inhibitory gradient. 5. As the noise stimulus was applied to an increasing number of adjacent whiskers, RSUs became more sharply tuned for deflection angles. Neither TCUs nor FSUs showed increases in angular tuning. 6. Inhibition worked disproportionately in RSUs to inhibit those responses that were initially the least robust. For example, inhibition was most effective at reducing responses to nonpreferred versus preferred whisker deflection angles. 7. To assess the principal whisker's effect on adjacent whisker excitatory responses, the noise stimulus was applied to the principal whisker. In RSUs, principal whisker-evoked inhibition was more potent than adjacent whisker-evoked inhibition. FSUs were excited to a greater extent by the application of the noise stimulus to the principal whisker than to adjacent whiskers. TCUs did not display principal whisker-evoked inhibition. 8. Inhibition within the barrel serves as a contrast enhancement mechanism to differentiate small versus large magnitude responses. Less vigorous responses, such as those associated with perturbations of noncolumnar whiskers and inputs from nonoptimal deflection angles, are more strongly suppressed. During active touch, when many whiskers simultaneously palpate an object, these inhibitory interactions could effectively increase the "principal whiskerness" of the cortical column.

[1]  D. Ferster Orientation selectivity of synaptic potentials in neurons of cat primary visual cortex , 1986, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[2]  W. Rall Distinguishing theoretical synaptic potentials computed for different soma-dendritic distributions of synaptic input. , 1967, Journal of neurophysiology.

[3]  Remo Guidieri Res , 1995, RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics.

[4]  J. S. McCasland,et al.  High‐resolution 2‐deoxyglucose mapping of functional cortical columns in mouse barrel cortex , 1988, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[5]  T A Woolsey,et al.  Functional organization in cortical barrels of normal and vibrissae‐damaged mice: A (3H) 2‐deoxyglucose study , 1985, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[6]  D J Simons,et al.  OFF response transformations in the whisker/barrel system. , 1994, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  D. Hubel,et al.  Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex , 1968, The Journal of physiology.

[8]  C. Welker Receptive fields of barrels in the somatosensory neocortex of the rat , 1976, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[9]  B. Connors,et al.  Intrinsic firing patterns of diverse neocortical neurons , 1990, Trends in Neurosciences.

[10]  D. Simons,et al.  Biometric analyses of vibrissal tactile discrimination in the rat , 1990, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[11]  D. Simons,et al.  Effects of baclofen and phaclofen on receptive field properties of rat whisker barrel neurons , 1996, Brain Research.

[12]  D. Simons Temporal and spatial integration in the rat SI vibrissa cortex. , 1985, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  L. Swanson The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates, George Paxinos, Charles Watson (Eds.). Academic Press, San Diego, CA (1982), vii + 153, $35.00, ISBN: 0 125 47620 5 , 1984 .

[14]  J. S. McCasland,et al.  Functional asymmetries in the rodent barrel cortex. , 1991, Somatosensory & motor research.

[15]  D. McCormick,et al.  Comparative electrophysiology of pyramidal and sparsely spiny stellate neurons of the neocortex. , 1985, Journal of neurophysiology.

[16]  D. Simons,et al.  Thalamocortical response transformation in the rat vibrissa/barrel system. , 1989, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  D J Woodward,et al.  Dynamic and distributed properties of many-neuron ensembles in the ventral posterior medial thalamus of awake rats. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  D. Simons Neuronal Integration in the Somatosensory Whisker/Barrel Cortex , 1995 .

[19]  E P Gardner,et al.  Spatial integration of multiple-point stimuli in primary somatosensory cortical receptive fields of alert monkeys. , 1980, Journal of Neurophysiology.

[20]  V. Mountcastle,et al.  Neural mechanisms subserving cutaneous sensibility, with special reference to the role of afferent inhibition in sensory perception and discrimination. , 1959, Bulletin of the Johns Hopkins Hospital.

[21]  A. Keller Synaptic Organization of the Barrel Cortex , 1995 .

[22]  D. Simons Response properties of vibrissa units in rat SI somatosensory neocortex. , 1978, Journal of neurophysiology.

[23]  T. Woolsey,et al.  The structural organization of layer IV in the somatosensory region (S I) of mouse cerebral cortex , 1970 .

[24]  W. Spencer,et al.  Cutaneous masking. II. Geometry of excitatory andinhibitory receptive fields of single units in somatosensory cortex of the cat. , 1979, Journal of neurophysiology.

[25]  E. White Cortical Circuits: Synaptic Organization of the Cerebral Cortex , 1989 .

[26]  J. Hyvärinen,et al.  Cortical neuronal mechanisms in flutter-vibration studied in unanesthetized monkeys. Neuronal periodicity and frequency discrimination. , 1969, Journal of neurophysiology.

[27]  S. Buffer,et al.  Barreloids in adult rat thalamus: Three‐dimensional architecture and relationship to somatosensory cortical barrels , 1995, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[28]  S. Ojeda,et al.  A rapid and simple procedure for chronic cannulation of the rat jugular vein. , 1974, Journal of applied physiology.

[29]  D. Simons,et al.  A reliable technique for marking the location of extracellular recording sites using glass micropipettes , 1987, Neuroscience Letters.

[30]  D. Simons Multi-whisker stimulation and its effects on vibrissa units in rat Sml barrel cortex , 1983, Brain Research.

[31]  G. Paxinos,et al.  The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates , 1983 .

[32]  D J Simons,et al.  Thalamocortical response transformations in simulated whisker barrels , 1993, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.