Different responses of rat cerebellar Purkinje cells and Golgi cells evoked by widespread convergent sensory inputs
Different responses of rat cerebellar Purkinje cells and Golgi cells evoked by widespread convergent sensory inputs
复制标题
DOI：
10.1113/jphysiol.2006.108282
复制
发表时间：
2006-07-15
影响因子：
5.5
通讯作者：
Edgley, Steve A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Holtzman, Tahl;Rajapaksa, Thimali;Edgley, Steve A.
虽然高尔基体细胞介导的抑制颗粒细胞的突触特性研究得很好，但对高尔基体细胞的传入输入知之甚少，因此它们在信息处理中的作用仍然不清楚。我们研究了小脑皮质高尔基细胞和浦肯野细胞在脚的后叶小脑半球的I和II的外周传入激活在体内的反应，使用麻醉大鼠。从70个高尔基体细胞和76个浦肯野细胞进行记录。浦肯野细胞被确定为存在的攀爬纤维反应。高尔基体细胞的自发放电模式和响应特性进行了鉴定，并确认使用单神经元（n = 16）的单细胞标记。在Crus 11浦肯野细胞表现出连续放电在相对较高的利率（25-60赫兹）和刺激外周传入很少引起实质性的反应。最常见的反应是简单尖峰输出的适度、长潜伏期、持久增加。相比之下，同样的刺激在高尔基体细胞中引起的最常见的反应是长潜伏期，长时间的放电抑制，在70%的高尔基体细胞中发现。高尔基体细胞凹陷的起始时间比浦肯野细胞兴奋的起始时间短。短暂的，短潜伏期的兴奋和减少，也引起了一些高尔基体细胞，很少在浦肯野细胞，但在大多数情况下，持久的抑郁症是唯一显着的变化，尖峰放电。高尔基体细胞的反应，可以诱发使用空气吹或触觉刺激和四种不同的麻醉方案。在这两种类型的神经元的持久的反应可以引起广泛的感受野，在许多情况下，包括远端传入从所有四肢，以及从三叉神经传入。这些高尔基体细胞的反应是不符合传统的反馈抑制或“增益控制”模型的高尔基体细胞功能。相反，他们认为小脑皮质的活动可以受到来自身体大部分的外周传入激活的一般水平的有力调节。在此基础上，高尔基体细胞可能作为一个上下文特异性门的传输通过苔藓纤维颗粒细胞途径。
While the synaptic properties of Golgi cell-mediated inhibition of granule cells are well studied, less is known of the afferent inputs to Golgi cells so their role in information processing remains unclear. We investigated the responses of cerebellar cortical Golgi cells and Purkinje cells in Crus I and II of the posterior lobe cerebellar hemisphere to activation of peripheral afferents in vivo, using anaesthetized rats. Recordings were made from 70 Golgi cells and 76 Purkinje cells. Purkinje cells were identified by the presence of climbing fibre responses. Golgi cells were identified by both spontaneous firing pattern and response properties, and identification was confirmed using juxtacellular labelling of single neurones (n = 16). Purkinje cells in Crus 11 showed continuous firing at relatively high rates (25-60 Hz) and stimulation of peripheral afferents rarely evoked substantial responses. The most common response was a modest, long-latency, long-lasting increase in simple spike output. By comparison, the most common response evoked in Golgi cells by the same stimuli was a long-latency, long-lasting depression of firing, found in similar to 70% of the Golgi cells tested. The onsets of Golgi cell depressions had shorter latencies than the Purkinje cell excitations. Brief, short-latency excitations and reductions in firing were also evoked in some Golgi cells, and rarely in Purkinje cells, but in most cases long-lasting depressions were the only significant change in spike firing. Golgi cell responses could be evoked using air puff or tactile stimuli and under four different anaesthetic regimens. Long-lasting responses in both neurone types could be evoked from wide receptive fields, in many cases including distal afferents from all four limbs, as well as from trigeminal afferents. These Golgi cell responses are not consistent with the conventional feedback inhibition or 'gain control' models of Golgi cell function. They suggest instead that cerebellar cortical activity can be powerfully modulated by the general level of peripheral afferent activation from much of the body. On this basis, Golgi cells may act as a context-specific gate on transmission through the mossy fibre-granule cell pathway.