Ablation Experiments on the Labyrinth of the Frog

McNally, W. J.; Tait, Joyce

doi:10.1152/ajplegacy.1925.75.1.155

Cited by 101 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, 2°VN mediating UT signals project to ocular motor and spinal targets (Fig. 12C) and contribute to maculo-ocular as well as to spinal reflexes in frog (Hess and Precht 1984;McNally and Tait 1925;Rohregger and Dieringer 2002;Tait and McNally 1934) as in cat Kushiro et al 2000;Uchino et al 1994Uchino et al , 1996Wilson et al 1977;Zakir et al 2000;Zhang et al 2001).…”

Section: Functional Role Of Otolith Organs In Frog and Mammalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The functional role of the saccule is characterized by an absence of a convergence between afferent SA signals and afferent signals from other labyrinthine organs, the absence of SA signals from vestibulo-ocular projections (Fig. 12D), and the absence of SA signals from maculo-ocular reflexes (Hess and Precht 1984;Rohregger and Dieringer 2002) as well as from postural reflexes (McNally and Tait 1925). This absence of a contribution of SA signals to vestibular reflexes is compatible with a major role of the saccule as a vibration sensitive and not as a classical vestibular organ in frog.…”

Section: Functional Role Of Otolith Organs In Frog and Mammalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patterns of Canal and Otolith Afferent Input Convergence in Frog Second-Order Vestibular Neurons

Straka

Holler

Goto

2002

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Straka, H., S. Holler, and F. Goto. Patterns of canal and otolith afferent input convergence in frog second-order vestibular neurons. J Neurophysiol 88: 2287-2301, 2002 10.1152/jn.00370.2002 were identified in the isolated frog brain by the presence of monosynaptic excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs) after separate electrical stimulation of individual vestibular nerve branches. Combinations of one macular and the three semicircular canal nerve branches or combinations of two macular nerve branches were stimulated separately in different sets of experiments. Monosynaptic EPSPs evoked from the utricle or from the lagena converged with monosynaptic EPSPs from one of the three semicircular canal organs in ϳ30% of 2°VN. Utricular afferent signals converged predominantly with horizontal canal afferent signals (74%), and lagenar afferent signals converged with anterior vertical (63%) or posterior vertical (37%) but not with horizontal canal afferent signals. This convergence pattern correlates with the coactivation of particular combinations of canal and otolith organs during natural head movements. A convergence of afferent saccular and canal signals was restricted to very few 2°VN (3%). In contrast to the considerable number of 2°VN that received an afferent input from the utricle or the lagena as well as from one of the three canal nerves (ϳ30%), smaller numbers of 2°VN (14% of each type of 2°otolith or 2°canal neuron) received an afferent input from only one particular otolith organ or from only one particular semicircular canal organ. Even fewer 2°VN received an afferent input from more than one semicircular canal or from more than one otolith nerve (ϳ7% each). Among 2°VN with afferent inputs from more than one otolith nerve, an afferent saccular nerve input was particularly rare (4 -5%). The restricted convergence of afferent saccular inputs with other afferent otolith or canal inputs as well as the termination pattern of saccular afferent fibers are compatible with a substrate vibration sensitivity of this otolith organ in frog. The ascending and/or descending projections of identified 2°VN were determined by the presence of antidromic spikes. 2°VN mediating afferent utricular and/or semicircular canal nerve signals had ascending and/or descending axons. 2°VN mediating afferent lagenar or saccular nerve signals had descending but no ascending axons. The latter result is consistent with the absence of short-latency macular signals on extraocular motoneurons during vertical linear acceleration. Comparison of data from frog and cat demonstrated the presence of a similar organization pattern of maculo-and canal-ocular reflexes in both species. I N T R O D U C T I O NComponents of linear and angular head acceleration are detected separately by the different otolith and semicircular canal organs in the labyrinth. These signals are mediated in parallel pathways by afferent nerve fibers to the vestibular nuclei, the brain stem reticular formation, and the cerebellum. Afferent nerve fibers from individual semicirc...

show abstract

Section: Functional Role Of Otolith Organs In Frog and Mammalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Functional Role Of Otolith Organs In Frog and Mammalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Canal and Otolith Afferent Input Convergence in Frog Second-Order Vestibular Neurons

Straka

Holler

Goto

2002

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The inner ear contains six vestibular organs (three semicircular canals, utricle, saccule and lagena) and two auditory organs (amphibian papilla and basilar papilla). The vestibular organs (see Chapters 14 and 15 in this Volume) are sensitive to acceleration, gravity and vibration and provide informational cues for spatial orientation (McNALLY and TAIT, 1925;TAIT and McNALLY, 1934;ASHCROFT and HALLPIKE, 1934 ;MACNAUGHTON and McNALLY, 1946). These organs have been presumed to be unresponsive to sound.…”

Section: Inner Earmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphology and Physiology of the Auditory System

Capranica¹

1976

Frog Neurobiology

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The placing of the canals in the rotation group is also strongly supported by the work of Steinhausen [1931,1933,1934], in the pike, on the intimate mechanism of canalicular stimulation. With regard to the saccular macula, the negative equilibrial experiments of Laudenbach [1899] and McNally and Tait [1925], and the electrical observations, both positive and negative, of Ashcroft andHallpike [1934 a, 1934 b], and also of McNally and the writer (unpublished), have established the fact that this organ is a receptor for vibration, and that it does not respond to tilting provided that it is not "joggled" in the process. The saccular macula therefore belongs to Group I.…”

Section: The Identification Of the Receptor Organmentioning

confidence: 99%