HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 102/5/2866    most recent 00618.2009v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Hedrich, U. B. S. Articles by Stein, W. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hedrich, U. B. S. Articles by Stein, W.

RESEARCH-ARTICLE

Differential Activation of Projection Neurons by Two Sensory Pathways Contributes to Motor Pattern Selection

Institute of Neurobiology, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany

Submitted 16 July 2009; accepted in final form 8 September 2009

ABSTRACT

Sensorimotor integration is known to occur at the level of motor circuits as well as in upstream interneurons that regulate motor activity. Here we show, using the crab stomatogastric nervous system (STNS) as a model, that different sensory systems affect the same set of projection neurons. However, they have qualitatively different effects on their activities (excitation vs. inhibition), and these differences contribute to the selection of motor patterns from multifunctional circuits. We compare the actions of the proprioceptive anterior gastric receptor (AGR) and the inferior ventricular (IV) neurons, which relay chemosensory information from the brain to the STNS, on modulatory commissural neurons 1 and 5 (MCN1 and MCN5) and commissural projection neuron 2 (CPN2) and their resulting actions on the gastric mill central pattern generating circuit in the stomatogastric ganglion. When stimulated, AGR and the IV neurons affect all three projection neurons but elicit distinct gastric mill rhythms. The effects of both sensory pathways on the projection neurons differ in the type of excitation provided to CPN2 and MCN5 (electrical vs. chemical) and the effect on MCN1 (direct inhibition by AGR vs. polysynaptic excitation by the IV neurons). The latter is functionally important because a restoration of MCN1 activity during the AGR rhythm made it more similar to that elicited by IV neuron stimulation. Our results thus support the hypothesis that sensory pathways activate different combinations of projection neurons to select distinct outputs from the same neuronal circuit.