FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2162850659> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2162850659 endingPage "1667" @default.
• W2162850659 startingPage "1666" @default.
• W2162850659 abstract "EDITORIAL FOCUSShould One Hand (Paw) Really Not Know What the Other Is Doing? Focus on “Reducing Contralateral SI Activity Reveals Hindlimb Receptive Fields in the SI Forelimb-Stump Representation of Neonatally Amputated Rats”Thomas A. WoolseyThomas A. WoolseyPublished Online:01 Sep 2005https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00518.2005MoreSectionsPDF (38 KB)Download PDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesGet permissionsTrack citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailWeChat Neural plasticity is one of several mechanisms used by the nervous system to assure that information for efficient and effective actions necessary for survival is coherent. In mammals, if not all animals, plasticity is related to different processes and components in the brain that vary in their magnitude, extent, and duration, all of which are highly dependent on developmental stage. In this issue of the Journal of Neurophysiology (p. 1727–1732), Pluto et al. 2005 provide evidence for active suppression of irrelevant communication within one cerebral hemisphere originating from the contralateral hemisphere. This extends a significant body of work from these same authors showing a strong role for ipsilateral, intracortical connections between limb representations in mediating inhibition to shape relevant (wanted) neural activity by reducing confounding (unwanted) neural activity in the somatosensory area (SI) of the rat cerebral cortex after neonatal forelimb amputation (Lane et al. 1997; Pluto et al. 2003; Stojic et al. 2001).Early work in mice provided evidence that ipsilateral whisker inputs activate barrel cortex at longer latencies than stimulation of the contralateral whiskers. Furthermore, the activation of ipsilateral SI from the whiskers is lost when contralateral SI is removed (Pidoux and Verley 1979). Patterns of connections between homologous cortical areas of the two sides of the brain vary. For instance, in contrast to many association areas, direct connections between motor, visual, and somatic cortices of the primate are sparse (Karol and Pandya 1971). As in primates, rats and mice have relatively few direct callosal connections between SI in the two hemispheres, which is in stark contrast to the dense direct projections from the somatosensory thalamus to the granular somatosensory cortex that defines the body map (Killackey and Ebner 1973). Information from different somatic regions—face, back, leg, etc.—is communicated between them in the same hemisphere and across the midline through the dysgranular cortex that surrounds granular cortex (Koralek et al. 1990).After neonatal forelimb amputation, 30% of multi-unit recordings in contralateral stump cortex can be activated by hindlimb stimulation after blocking GABAA+B receptors (GRBs) with topical bicuculline methiodide/saclofen hydrochloride, indicating that ipsilateral hindlimb inputs are suppressed by inhibition. This is in distinction to the 12% found in normal animals (Pluto et al. 2005). Earlier studies from the same group showed that pathways from the hindlimb cortex are routed through interposed dysgranular cortex (see Fig. 5 of Pluto et al. 2003). In this study, inputs from functionally identified forelimb region in the opposite hemisphere were suppressed with topical lidocaine. As a result, slightly more than one-half of the stump cortical sites that were activated by hindlimb after ipsilateral GRBs were activated by hindlimb stimulation after anesthesia of the opposite cortex, presumably through the dysgranular cortex (Pluto et al. 2005).Clinicians had puzzled for many years as to why some adults with misaligned eyes in childhood should be virtually blind in one eye but not the other when both eyes were otherwise normal (Hohmann and Creutzfeldt 1975). Similar misalignments in adults cause double vision. Study of the bases for this phenomenon led Hubel and Wiesel (2005) to conduct a series of groundbreaking studies on neural plasticity of the visual cortex. While many of these findings have been attributed to altered connections, they also reflect changes in the balance of activity carried over different connections to effectively modulate excessive or confusing information (Ito 2002; Knott et al. 2002; Markram et al. 2004; Simons and Land 1987).There is precedent, especially with lesions to the periphery in the neonatal period, for significant changes in cortical connections (Miller et al. 2001). Pluto et al. 2005 indicate that they are presently evaluating connections in their model. Whatever they find, this study makes clear the impact of interhemispheric connections in the inhibition of abnormal, confounding inputs. Its precise basis can be understood, in part, because of the simple organization of the rat SI cortex, anatomical markers that define its components and postnatal development of its connections (Woolsey 2003).Inhibition plays a major role in shaping responses and actions in the normal brain. Pluto et al. (2005) document elegantly such interactions in normal and altered rat somatosensory cortex. Virtually all neural systems use this strategy, such as to suppress unwanted movements while permitting the desired ones (Mink 1996) or to focus attention where it is needed (Posner 1986). It is perhaps not surprising, therefore, that there is a strong role for converging inhibition in the functional adjustments in the brain after major perturbations such as limb amputations, eye misalignments, sensory deprivation, and physical constraints in developing systems. Inhibition, despite early views that it did not play a role in brain function (i.e., Ramón y Cajal 1995) and its considerable metabolic costs, ultimately saves energy in the operation of the energetically expensive brain (Shulman et al. 2004). Pluto et al. provide compelling evidence that, in the somatic sensory system, inhibition from several sources plays a key role in the effective functional recovery from early trauma. Rats with an amputated forelimb can and do go about their lives almost as if they were normal. Evidently rats heed not the admonition, “… let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth” (Mathew 6:3).REFERENCESHohmann and Creutzfeldt 1975 Hohmann A and Creutzfeldt OD. Squint and the development of binocularity in humans. Nature 254: 613–614, 1975.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarHubel and Wiesel 2005 Hubel DH and Wiesel TN. Brain and Visual Perception: The Story of a 25-Year Collaboration. New York: Oxford, 2005.Google ScholarIto 2002 Ito M. Historical review of the significance of the cerebellum and the role of Purkinje cells in motor learning. Ann NY Acad Sci 978: 273–288, 2002.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarKarol and Pandya 1971 Karol EA and Pandya DN. The distribution of the corpus callosum in the rhesus monkey. Brain 94: 471, 1971.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarKillackey and Ebner 1973 Killackey HP and Ebner FF. Two different types of thalamocortical projections to a single cortical area in mammals. Brain Behav Evol 6: 141–169, 1973.ISI | Google ScholarKnott et al. 2002 Knott GW, Quairiaux C, Genoud C, and Welker E. Formation of dendritic spines with GABAergic synapses induced by whisker stimulation in adult mice. Neuron 34: 265–273, 2002.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarKoralek et al. 1990 Koralek KA, Olavarria J, and Killackey HP. Areal and laminar organization of corticortical projections in the rat somatosensory cortex. J Comp Neurol 299: 133–150, 1990.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarLane et al. 1997 Lane RD, Killackey HP, and Rhoades RW. Blockade of GABAergic inhibition reveals reordered cortical somatotopic maps in rats that sustained neonatal forelimb removal. J Neurophysiol 77: 2723–2735, 1997.Link | ISI | Google ScholarMathew Mathew–6:3. The Holy Bible: conteyning the Old Testament and the New. London: Robert Barker, 1612.Google ScholarMarkram et al. 2004 Markram H, Toledo-Rodriguez M, Wang Y, Gupta A, Silberberg G, and Wu C. Interneurons of the neocortical inhibitory system. Nat Rev Neurosci 5: 793–807, 2004.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarMiller et al. 2001 Miller B, Blake NMJ, and Woolsey TA. Barrel cortex: structural organization, development and plasticity. In: Plasticity of Adult Barrel Cortex, edited by Kossut M. Johnson City, TN: F.P. Graham, 2001, p. 3–45.Google ScholarMink 1996 Mink JW. The basal ganglia: focused selection and inhibition of competing motor programs. Prog Neurobiol 50: 381–425, 1996.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarPidoux and Verley 1979 Pidoux B and Verley R. Projections on the cortical somatic I barrel subfield from ipsilateral vibrissae in adult rodents. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 46: 715–726, 1979.Crossref | PubMed | Google ScholarPluto et al. 2005 Pluto CP, Chiaia NL, Rhoades RW, and Lane RD. Reducing contralateral SI activity reveals hindlimb receptive fields in the SI forelimb-stump representation of neonatally amputated rats. J Neurophysiol 94: 1727–1732, 2005.Link | ISI | Google ScholarPluto et al. 2003 Pluto CP, Lane RD, Chiaia NL, Stojic AS, and Rhoades RW. Role of development in reorganization of the SI forelimb-stump representation in fetally, neonatally, and adult amputated rats. J Neurophysiol 90: 1842–1851, 2003.Link | ISI | Google ScholarPosner 1986 Posner MI. Chronometric Explorations of Mind: The Third Paul M. Fitts Lectures. New York: Oxford, 1986.Google ScholarRamón y Cajal S. Ramón y Cajal S. Preface to the American Edition. In: Histology of the Nervous System of Man and Vertebrates (1st ed.), edited by Swanson LW. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995, p. xxviii.Google ScholarShulman et al. 2004 Shulman RG, Rothman DL, Behar KL, and Hyder F. Energetic basis of brain activity: implications for neuroimaging. Trends Neurosci 27: 489–495, 2004.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarSimons and Land 1987 Simons DJ and Land PW. Early experience of tactile stimulation influences organization of somatic sensory cortex. Nature 326: 694–697, 1987.Crossref | PubMed | ISI | Google ScholarStojic et al. 2001 Stojic AS, Lane RD, and Rhoades RW. Intracortical pathway involving dysgranular cortex conveys hindlimb inputs to S-I forelimb-stump representation of neonatally amputated rats. J Neurophysiol 85: 407–413, 2001.Link | ISI | Google ScholarWoolsey 2003 Woolsey TA. Barrel cortex. Available online at http://www.ibro.info/Pub_Main_Display.asp?Main_ID=21. Accessed on July 5, 2005.Google ScholarAUTHOR NOTESAddress for reprint requests and other correspondence: T. A. Woolsey, Dept. of Neurosurgery, Campus Box 8057, Washington Univ. School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave., St. Louis, MO 63110 (E-mail: [email protected]) Download PDF Previous Back to Top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedInformationCited ByCortical plasticity induced by different degrees of peripheral nerve injuries: a rat functional magnetic resonance imaging study under 9.4 Tesla25 September 2014 | Journal of Brachial Plexus and Peripheral Nerve Injury, Vol. 08, No. 01Dynamic representations of the somatosensory cortexNeuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, Vol. 34, No. 2 More from this issue > Volume 94Issue 3September 2005Pages 1666-1667 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2005 by the American Physiological Societyhttps://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00518.2005PubMed16105953History Published online 1 September 2005 Published in print 1 September 2005 Metrics" @default.
• W2162850659 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2162850659 creator A5086014621 @default.
• W2162850659 date "2005-09-01" @default.
• W2162850659 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2162850659 title "<i>Should One Hand (Paw) Really Not Know What the Other Is Doing?</i> Focus on “Reducing Contralateral SI Activity Reveals Hindlimb Receptive Fields in the SI Forelimb-Stump Representation of Neonatally Amputated Rats”" @default.
• W2162850659 cites W1968656342 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W1983437632 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W1987704889 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W1990753743 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2005269174 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2025603247 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2027419157 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2058854064 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2079142871 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2088505072 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2105808890 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2112075984 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2128563899 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2222932910 @default.
• W2162850659 cites W2341272969 @default.
• W2162850659 doi "https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00518.2005" @default.
• W2162850659 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16105953" @default.
• W2162850659 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W2162850659 type Work @default.
• W2162850659 sameAs 2162850659 @default.
• W2162850659 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W2162850659 countsByYear W21628506592014 @default.
• W2162850659 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2162850659 hasAuthorship W2162850659A5086014621 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C105702510 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C120665830 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C19071747 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C192209626 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C2776359362 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C2778646069 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C51738704 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C105702510 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C120665830 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C121332964 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C15744967 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C169760540 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C17744445 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C19071747 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C192209626 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C199539241 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C2776359362 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C2778646069 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C51738704 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C86803240 @default.
• W2162850659 hasConceptScore W2162850659C94625758 @default.
• W2162850659 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2162850659 hasLocation W21628506591 @default.
• W2162850659 hasLocation W21628506592 @default.
• W2162850659 hasOpenAccess W2162850659 @default.
• W2162850659 hasPrimaryLocation W21628506591 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W1964867684 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W1985468851 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W2016322694 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W2046996851 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W2050106819 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W2060145940 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W2061320031 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W2089369791 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W2288155907 @default.
• W2162850659 hasRelatedWork W2312572943 @default.
• W2162850659 hasVolume "94" @default.
• W2162850659 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2162850659 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2162850659 magId "2162850659" @default.
• W2162850659 workType "article" @default.