JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 81: 2711-2719, 1999;
0022-3077/99 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vega-Bermudez, F.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, K. O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vega-Bermudez, F.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, K. O.

The Journal of Neurophysiology Vol. 81 No. 6 June 1999, pp. 2711-2719
Copyright ©1999 by the American Physiological Society

Surround Suppression in the Responses of Primate SA1 and RA Mechanoreceptive Afferents Mapped with a Probe Array

F. Vega-Bermudez and K. O. Johnson

Department of Neuroscience and Krieger Mind/Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218

Vega-Bermudez, F. and K. O. Johnson. Surround Suppression in the Responses of Primate SA1 and RA Mechanoreceptive Afferents Mapped with a Probe Array. J. Neurophysiol. 81: 2711-2719, 1999.Surround suppression in the responses of primate SA1 and RA mechanoreceptive afferents mapped with a probe array. Twenty-four slowly adapting type 1 (SA1) and 26 rapidly adapting (RA) cutaneous mechanoreceptive afferents in the rhesus monkey were studied with an array of independently controlled, punctate probes that covered an entire fingerpad. Each afferent had a receptive field (RF) on a single fingerpad and was studied at 73 skin sites (50 mm2). The entire array was lowered to 1.6 to 3.0 mm below the point of initial skin contact (the background indentation) before delivering indentations with one to seven probes. Indentations were generally limited to 100 µm to minimize gross mechanical interactions. There were two major, new findings. 1) The discharge rates of both SA1 and RA afferents were strongly affected by the number of probes indenting the RF simultaneously. The effect was exponential. Each increase in probe number reduced the response by 24% in SA1 and 12% in RA afferents on average. When seven probes indented the skin simultaneously, the impulse rates in SA1 and RA afferents were reduced to 20 and 40% of the rates evoked by a single probe at the hot spot (all indentations were 100 µm). This shows that before any synaptic interaction in the CNS there is already a mechanism analogous to surround inhibition that suppresses an afferent's responses to uniform indentation and makes it especially sensitive to deviations from spatial uniformity. 2) The responses of both SA1 and RA afferents were independent of background array depth over the range from 1.6 to 3 mm below the point of initial skin contact. This shows that the neural responses to elements raised above a background are independent of the applied force over a wide range of forces. To relate the background depths to indentation force and to compare humans and monkeys, we studied the biomechanics of indentation with a uniform surface. A remarkable result is that the force-displacement relationships in humans and monkeys were the same; the skin is highly compliant for the first 2-3 mm of indentation and then becomes much stiffer. The results were the same in alert humans and monkeys and in monkeys anesthetized with pentobarbital. Ketamine anesthesia made the skin much stiffer and reduced the compliant range substantially.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
A. P. Sripati, S. J. Bensmaia, and K. O. Johnson
A Continuum Mechanical Model of Mechanoreceptive Afferent Responses to Indented Spatial Patterns
J Neurophysiol, June 1, 2006; 95(6): 3852 - 3864.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
A. P. Sripati, T. Yoshioka, P. Denchev, S. S. Hsiao, and K. O. Johnson
Spatiotemporal Receptive Fields of Peripheral Afferents and Cortical Area 3b and 1 Neurons in the Primate Somatosensory System
J. Neurosci., February 15, 2006; 26(7): 2101 - 2114.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BrainHome page
F. Vega-Bermudez and K. O. Johnson
Spatial acuity after digit amputation
Brain, June 1, 2002; 125(6): 1256 - 1264.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
I. Birznieks, P. Jenmalm, A. W. Goodwin, and R. S. Johansson
Encoding of Direction of Fingertip Forces by Human Tactile Afferents
J. Neurosci., October 15, 2001; 21(20): 8222 - 8237.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
T. Yoshioka, B. Gibb, A. K. Dorsch, S. S. Hsiao, and K. O. Johnson
Neural Coding Mechanisms Underlying Perceived Roughness of Finely Textured Surfaces
J. Neurosci., September 1, 2001; 21(17): 6905 - 6916.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
J. W. Bisley, A. W. Goodwin, and H. E. Wheat
Slowly Adapting Type I Afferents From the Sides and End of the Finger Respond to Stimuli on the Center of the Fingerpad
J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2000; 84(1): 57 - 64.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NeurologyHome page
R. W. V. Boven, R. H. Hamilton, T. Kauffman, J. P. Keenan, and A. Pascual-Leone
Tactile spatial resolution in blind Braille readers
Neurology, June 27, 2000; 54(12): 2230 - 2236.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
F. Vega-Bermudez and K. O. Johnson
SA1 and RA Receptive Fields, Response Variability, and Population Responses Mapped with a Probe Array
J Neurophysiol, June 1, 1999; 81(6): 2701 - 2710.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online