Trigeminal disynaptic circuit mediating corneal afferent input to m. depressor palpebrae inferioris motoneurons in the pigeon (Columba livia)

Wild, J. Martin

doi:10.1002/(sici)1096-9861(19990118)403:3<391::aid-cne8>3.0.co;2-c

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In nonsongbirds, different subnuclei of the main (intermediate), trigeminal motor nucleus (MVi) innervate all the jawclosing muscles and the protractor of the independently mobile upper jaw (Bock, 1964), whereas the dorsal facial nucleus innervates the depressor of the lower jaw (Wild and Zeigler, 1980; den Boer et al, 1986). A similar arrangement appears to be present for the trigeminal motor complex in songbirds (Wild, 1999, and unpublished observations). The injections were made using glass micro-pipettes (outer diameter 10–25 µm) filled with either 1% unconjugated cholera toxin B subunit (CTB; List Biological Laboratories, Campbell, CA) in 0.01M phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), pH 7 .4, or 10% biotinylated dextran amine in PBS (BDA; Invitrogen, Eugene, OR; 10k MW in 0.01 M PBS).…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 65%

“…Although premotor neurons in RPcvm apparently project to several motor nuclei, in addition to those of MV and MVIId that innervate jaw closer and opener muscles, viz., XII l, which innervates the intrinsic tongue muscles (Wild and Zeigler, 1980; Wild, 1981, 1990); MVIIv, which innervates extrinsic tongue retractor muscles (Wild and Zeigler, 1980; Arends and Dubbeldam, 1982; Bout, 1987; Dubbeldam and Bout, 1990); and IXr, which innervates the tongue protractor muscle, M. geniohyoideus (Wild, 1981; Bout, 1987), the only trigeminal motor subnucleus that did not appear to receive a projection from RPcvm was that innervating the muscles of the lower eyelid (den Boer et al, 1986; Wild, 1999). Thus, the jaw muscle motor nuclei receive the heaviest innervation from RPcvm, in keeping with the vital role of the jaw muscles in feeding, preening, and gape modulation during vocalization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trigeminal and telencephalic projections to jaw and other upper vocal tract premotor neurons in songbirds: Sensorimotor circuitry for beak movements during singing

Wild¹,

Krützfeldt²

2011

J of Comparative Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During singing in songbirds, the extent of beak opening, like the extent of mouth opening in human singers, is partially correlated with the fundamental frequency of the sounds emitted. Since song in songbirds is under the control of “the song system” (a collection of interconnected forebrain nuclei dedicated to the learning and production of song), it might be expected that beak movements during singing would also be controlled by this system. However, direct neural connections between the telencephalic output of the song system and beak muscle motor neurons in the brainstem are conspicuous by their absence, leaving unresolved the question of how beak movements are affected during singing. By using standard tract tracing methods, we sought to answer this question by defining beak premotor neurons and examining their afferent projections. In the caudal medulla, jaw premotor cell bodies were located adjacent to the terminal field of the output of the song system, into which many premotor neurons extended their dendrites. The premotor neurons also received a novel input from the trigeminal ganglion and an overlapping input from a lateral arcopallial component of a trigeminal sensorimotor circuit that traverses the forebrain. The ganglionic input in songbirds, which is not present in doves and pigeons that vocalize with a closed beak, may modulate the activity of beak premotor neurons in concert with the output of the song system. These inputs to jaw premotor neurons could, together, affect beak movements as a means of modulating filter properties of the upper vocal tract during singing.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trigeminal and telencephalic projections to jaw and other upper vocal tract premotor neurons in songbirds: Sensorimotor circuitry for beak movements during singing

Wild¹,

Krützfeldt²

2011

J of Comparative Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, while the dorsal horn does not exhibit calbindin-like immunoreactive fiber endings, in nTTDc there is a small but very conspicuous ventral region with strongly immunostained endings (black arrowheads in Figures 1b'-c' and 2). These calbindin-like immunoreactive endings resemble corneal afferents previously described in the pigeon nTTD(Wild, 1999). No differences in coronal cell diameters(Figure 3a, b)were detected between rostral cervical horn and nTTDc; in both regions cells were homogeneously distributed and relatively small, with the average coronal diameters being 8.15 6 2.3 and 8.13 6 1.7 mm, respectively (long diameter 1 short diameter)/2 6 standard deviation).None of the more rostral nTTD subdivisions exhibit any calbindinlike immunoreactivity(Figure 1d'-h').…”

supporting

confidence: 80%

“…CTB application to the cornea produces a very restricted labeled area in nTTDc (as in pigeons, Wild, ), which coincides with the calbindin‐like immunostained endings. Double immunofluorescence against CTB and calbindin after CTB application to the cornea shows that the two signals co‐localize (Figure ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…However, whether this boundary has any functional significance remains to be ascertained. Furthermore, we showed that the fiber endings from corneal receptors in nTTDc (Wild, ) are calbindin‐like immunoreactive in the zebra finch. The relative positions of the terminal fields of the three trigeminal branches (V3, V2, V1) switch from medial to lateral in the dorsal horn to dorsomedial to ventrolateral in the nTTD, whereas in PrV there is considerable overlap of ophthalmic and mandibular terminal fields in the coronal plane.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The sensory trigeminal complex and the organization of its primary afferents in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata)

Faunes

Wild

2017

J of Comparative Neurology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our knowledge of the avian sensory trigeminal system has been largely restricted to the principal trigeminal nucleus (PrV) and its ascending projections to the forebrain. Studies addressing the cytoarchitecture and organization of afferent input to the sensory trigeminal complex, which includes both the PrV and the nuclei of the descending trigeminal tract (nTTD), have only been performed in pigeons and ducks. Here we extend such an analysis to a songbird, the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata). We describe the cytoarchitecture of the sensory trigeminal complex, the patterns of calbindin-like and substance P-like immunoreactivity, and the organization of afferents from the three branches of the trigeminal nerve and from the lingual branch of the hypoglossal nerve. On the basis of cytoarchitecture and immunohistochemistry, the sensory trigeminal column can be subdivided from caudal to rostral, as in other species, into cervical dorsal horn, subnucleus caudalis, subnucleus interpolaris, subnucleus oralis, and nucleus principalis. The relative positions of the terminal fields of the three trigeminal branches move from medial to lateral in the dorsal horn to dorsomedial to ventrolateral in nTTD, whereas in PrV there is considerable overlap of mandibular and ophthalmic terminal fields, with only a small maxillary input ventrally. The hypoglossal afferents, which terminate medially in the dorsal horn and dorsolaterally in nTTD, terminate in specific cell groups in the dorsolateral nTTDo and in PrV. This work sets the grounds for further analyses of the ascending connections of the nTTD and the afferents from the syrinx to the trigeminal sensory column.

show abstract

Learned modification of the nictitating membrane reflex by auditory stimuli in the barn owl

Bala

Takahashi

2005

J Comp Physiol A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The barn owl, Tyto alba, extends its nictitating membrane (NM) in response to an air puff to the cornea or a mild para-orbital electrodermal shock. The NM extension habituated rapidly if the stimulus was repeated. Habituation was prevented by pairing the aversive stimulus with a sound. The sound stimulus did not, by itself, induce an NM extension. Repeated pairing of sound with the aversive stimulus caused the subjects to modify the duration of their NM extension, increasing the duration when exposed to longer aversive stimuli and decreasing in response to shorter stimuli. No transference of the response was seen from the aversive stimulus to the sound. The learned change in duration of the NM extension resisted extinction. This modification of the NM extension reflex resembles previous descriptions of primer-produced facilitation.

show abstract

Trigeminal disynaptic circuit mediating corneal afferent input to m. depressor palpebrae inferioris motoneurons in the pigeon (Columba livia)

Cited by 8 publications

References 59 publications

Trigeminal and telencephalic projections to jaw and other upper vocal tract premotor neurons in songbirds: Sensorimotor circuitry for beak movements during singing

Trigeminal and telencephalic projections to jaw and other upper vocal tract premotor neurons in songbirds: Sensorimotor circuitry for beak movements during singing

The sensory trigeminal complex and the organization of its primary afferents in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata)

Learned modification of the nictitating membrane reflex by auditory stimuli in the barn owl

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About