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


     


J Neurophysiol (July 13, 2005). doi:10.1152/jn.00002.2005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
94/5/3023    most recent
00002.2005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Bensmaia, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, K. O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bensmaia, S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, K. O.
Submitted on January 3, 2005
Accepted on July 11, 2005

Vibratory adaptation of cutaneous mechanoreceptive afferents

Sliman J. Bensmaia1*, Yuk-Yuen Leung1, Steven S. Hsiao1, and Kenneth O. Johnson1

1 Mind/Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: sliman{at}jhu.edu.

The objective of the present study was to investigate the effects of extended suprathreshold vibratory stimulation on the sensitivity of slowly adapting type 1 (SA1), rapidly adapting (RA), and Pacinian (PC) afferents. To that end, an algorithm was developed to track afferent absolute (I0) and entrainment (I1) thresholds as they change over time. We recorded afferent responses to periliminal vibratory test stimuli, which were interleaved with intense vibratory conditioning stimuli during the adaptation period of each experimental run. From these measurements, the algorithm allowed us to infer changes in the afferents' sensitivity. We investigate the stimulus parameters that affect adaptation by assessing the degree to which adaptation depends on the amplitude and frequency of the adapting stimulus. For all three afferent types, I0 and I1 increase with increasing adaptation frequency and amplitude. The degree of adaptation seems to be independent of the firing rate evoked in the afferent by the conditioning stimulus. In the analysis, we distinguish between additive adaptation (in which I0 and I1 shift equally) and multiplicative effects (in which the ratio I1/I0 remains constant). RA threshold shifts are almost perfectly additive. SA1 threshold shifts are close to additive and far from multiplicative (I1 threshold shifts are twice the I0 shifts). PC shifts are more difficult to classify. We use an integrate-and-fire model to investigate the possible neural mechanisms. A change in transducer gain predicts a multiplicative change in I0 and I1 and is thus ruled out as a mechanism underlying SA1 and RA adaptation. A change in the resting action potential threshold predicts equal, additive change in I0 and I1 and thus accounts well for RA adaptation. A change in the degree of refractoriness during the relative refractory period predicts an additional change in I1 such as that observed for SA1 fibers. We infer that adaptation is due to an increase in spiking thresholds produced by ion flow through transducer channels in the receptor membrane. In a companion paper, we describe the time course of vibratory adaptation and recovery for SA1, RA and PC fibers.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
M. A. Muniak, S. Ray, S. S. Hsiao, J. F. Dammann, and S. J. Bensmaia
The Neural Coding of Stimulus Intensity: Linking the Population Response of Mechanoreceptive Afferents with Psychophysical Behavior
J. Neurosci., October 24, 2007; 27(43): 11687 - 11699.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
S. B. Simons, J. Chiu, O. V. Favorov, B. L. Whitsel, and M. Tommerdahl
Duration-Dependent Response of SI to Vibrotactile Stimulation in Squirrel Monkey
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2007; 97(3): 2121 - 2129.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
L. J. Berryman, J. M. Yau, and S. S. Hsiao
Representation of Object Size in the Somatosensory System
J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2006; 96(1): 27 - 39.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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
M. Hollins, F. Lorenz, and D. Harper
Somatosensory coding of roughness: the effect of texture adaptation in direct and indirect touch.
J. Neurosci., May 17, 2006; 26(20): 5582 - 5588.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
A. W. Goodwin
Paradoxes in Tactile Adaptation. Focus on "Vibratory Adaptation in Cutaneous Mechanoreceptive Afferents" and "Time-Course of Vibratory Adaptation and Recovery in Cutaneous Mechanoreceptive Afferents"
J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2005; 94(5): 2995 - 2996.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2005 by the The American Physiological Society.