Peripheral patterns of terminal innervation of vestibular primary afferent neurons projecting to the vestibulocerebellum in the gerbil

Purcell, Ian M.; Perachio, Adrian A.

doi:10.1002/cne.1124

Cited by 46 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fourth, CS and SS modulation in nodular Purkinje cells occurs only during roll-pitch. Modulation does not occur during yaw, even though horizontal semicircular canal primary afferents project onto granule cells in the uvula-nodulus (Kevetter and Perachio, 1986;Barmack and Shojaku, 1995;Fushiki and Barmack, 1997;Purcell and Perachio, 2001;Newlands et al, 2002;Maklad and Fritzsch, 2003). This suggests that vestibular primary afferents not only have the wrong polarity, but that their synaptic influence is too weak to account for the observed modulation of SSs.…”

Section: Antiphasic Behavior Of Css and Sssmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…They are distributed in the granule cell layer both mediolaterally and rostrocaudally over several millimeters of cerebellar cortex, in multiple folia (Kevetter and Perachio, 1986;Wu et al, 1999;Purcell and Perachio, 2001;Newlands et al, 2002;Maklad and Fritzsch, 2003). Any remaining topographic precision conveyed by mossy fiber signals to the granule cell layer is further reduced mediolaterally by the projections of parallel fibers that course through as many as 500 Purkinje cells (Brand et al, 1976;Harvey and Napper, 1991).…”

Section: Antiphasic Behavior Of Css and Sssmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Vestibular primary afferent mossy fibers originate from each of the five ipsilateral vestibular endorgans and project to the ipsilateral nodulus and ventral uvula (Carpenter et al, 1972;Alley et al, 1975;Korte, 1979;Kevetter and Perachio, 1986;Barmack et al, 1993a;Purcell and Perachio, 2001; Maklad and Fritzsch, 2003) (see Fig. 1 A).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Functions of Interneurons in Mouse Cerebellum

Barmack¹,

Yakhnitsa²

2008

J. Neurosci.

217

259

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The output signal of Purkinje cells is conveyed by the modulated discharge of simple spikes (SSs) often ascribed to mossy fiber-granule cell-parallel fiber inputs to Purkinje cell dendrites. Although generally accepted, this view lacks experimental support. We can address this view by controlling afferent signals that reach the cerebellum over climbing and mossy fiber pathways. Vestibular primary afferents constitute the largest mossy fiber projection to the uvula-nodulus. The discharge of vestibular primary afferent mossy fibers increases during ipsilateral roll tilt. The discharge of SSs decreases during ipsilateral roll tilt. Climbing fiber discharge [complex spikes (CSs)] increases during ipsilateral roll tilt. These observations suggest that the modulation of SSs during vestibular stimulation cannot be attributed directly to vestibular mossy fiber afferents. Rather we suggest that interneurons driven by vestibular climbing fibers may determine SS modulation. We recorded from cerebellar interneurons (granule, unipolar brush, Golgi, stellate, basket, and Lugaro cells) and Purkinje cells in the uvula-nodulus of anesthetized mice during vestibular stimulation. We identified all neuronal types by juxtacellular labeling with neurobiotin. Granule, unipolar brush, stellate, and basket cells discharge in phase with ipsilateral roll tilt and in phase with CSs. Golgi cells discharge out of phase with ipsilateral roll tilt and out of phase with CSs. The phases of stellate and basket cell discharge suggests that their activity could account for the antiphasic behavior of CSs and SSs. Because Golgi cells discharge in phase with SSs, Golgi cell activity cannot account for SS modulation. The sagittal array of Golgi cell axon terminals suggests that they contribute to the organization of discrete parasagittal vestibular zones.

show abstract

Section: Antiphasic Behavior Of Css and Sssmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Antiphasic Behavior Of Css and Sssmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Functions of Interneurons in Mouse Cerebellum

Barmack¹,

Yakhnitsa²

2008

J. Neurosci.

217

259

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There exists recent evidence suggesting the existence of weak utricular afferent projections to the FL/VPFL in the macaque (Newlands et al 2003; but see Langer et al 1985b;Nagao et al 1997). Interestingly, these utricular projections in the primate FL/VPFL were not present in the gerbil (Newlands et al 2002;Purcell and Perachio 2001), perhaps reflecting the evolutionary change in otolith-ocular function.…”

Section: Is There a Role For The Cerebellar Flocculus/ventral Paraflomentioning

confidence: 97%

Eyes on Target: What Neurons Must do for the Vestibuloocular Reflex During Linear Motion

Angelaki

2004

Journal of Neurophysiology

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Angelaki, Dora E. Eyes on target: what neurons must do for the vestibuloocular reflex during linear motion. J Neurophysiol 92: 20 -35, 2004; 10.1152/jn.00047.2004. A gaze-stabilization reflex that has been conserved throughout evolution is the rotational vestibuloocular reflex (RVOR), which keeps images stable on the entire retina during head rotation. An ethological newer reflex, the translational or linear VOR (TVOR), provides fast foveal image stabilization during linear motion. Whereas the sensorimotor processing has been extensively studied in the RVOR, much less is currently known about the neural organization of the TVOR. Here we summarize the computational problems faced by the system and the potential solutions that might be used by brain stem and cerebellar neurons participating in the VORs. First and foremost, recent experimental and theoretical evidence has shown that, contrary to popular beliefs, the sensory signals driving the TVOR arise from both the otolith organs and the semicircular canals. Additional unresolved issues include a scaling by both eye position and vergence angle as well as the temporal transformation of linear acceleration signals into eye-position commands. Behavioral differences between the RVOR and TVOR, as well as distinct differences in neuroanatomical and neurophysiological properties, raise multiple functional questions and computational issues, only some of which are readily understood. In this review, we provide a summary of what is known about the functional properties and neural substrates for this oculomotor system and outline some specific hypotheses about how sensory information is centrally processed to create motor commands for the VORs. I N T R O D U C T I O NThe world is viewed from a constantly shifting platform, where visual mechanisms function optimally only if images on the retina remain stable. This is achieved primarily by the vestibuloocular reflexes (VORs), which provide fast compensation during both translational and rotational motions. Although the rotational VOR (RVOR) is phylogenetically older and highly conserved throughout evolution, the translational VOR (TVOR) represents a relatively recent evolutionary acquisition that appears to have evolved in parallel with foveal vision, vergence eye movements, and stereopsis (Miles 1993(Miles , 1998. Its amplitude and functional properties are only well described for humans and non-human primates (Angelaki and McHenry 1999; McHenry and Angelaki 2000;Paige 1989; Paige and Tomko 1991a,b;Ramat and Zee 2003;Schwarz and Miles 1991;Schwarz et al. 1989;Telford et al. 1997;Zhou et al. 2003). In contrast, an image-stabilization system appropriate to compensate for the visual consequences of translational motion remains rudimentary or absent in lateral-eyed species (Baarsma and Collewijn 1975; Dickman and Angelaki 1999;Hess and Dieringer 1990, 1991; Hess et al. 1984; Maruta et al. 2001). The functional goal of the TVOR is to decrease conjugate retinal slip and minimize binocular disparities during either self-motion...

show abstract

“…In folia 9c-10 sinusoidal roll tilt parametrically modulates the discharge of both climbing and mossy fibers (Barmack and Shojaku 1995;Fushiki and Barmack 1997;Yakhnitsa and Barmack 2006). Folia 9c-10 receive the largest known singlesource mossy fiber projection from vestibular primary afferents that originate from ipsilateral labyrinth (Alley et al 1975;Barmack et al 1993a;Carpenter et al 1972;Gerrits et al 1989;Kevetter and Perachio 1986;Korte 1979;Maklad and Fritzsch 2003;Purcell and Perachio 2001;Voogd and Barmack 2005). Folia 8 -9a receive only a nominal vestibular primary or secondary afferent projection (Barmack et al 1993a;Barmack and Yakhnitsa 2012;Maklad and Fritzsch 2003), although they share with folia 9c-10 a large vestibular climbing fiber projection from the ␤-nucleus and dorsomedial cell column (DMCC) of the contralateral inferior olive (Alley et al 1975;Barmack and Yakhnitsa 2003;Fushiki and Barmack 1997;Groenewegen and Voogd 1977;Hoddevik and Brodal 1977;Schonewille et al 2006;Tan et al 1995;Voogd et al 1996;Voogd and Barmack 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%