JN Information on EB 2010
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (December 29, 2004). doi:10.1152/jn.01202.2004
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
93/5/2940    most recent
01202.2004v1
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 Web of Science
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 Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Evans, C. G.
Right arrow Articles by Cropper, E. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Evans, C. G.
Right arrow Articles by Cropper, E. C.
Submitted on November 22, 2004
Accepted on December 22, 2004

Inhibition of afferent transmission in the feeding circuitry of Aplysia: Persistence can be as important as size

Colin G. Evans1, Adarli Romero1, and Elizabeth C. Cropper1*

1 Physiol./Biophysics, Mt. Sinai Schl Med, New York, NY, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: elizabeth.cropper{at}mssm.edu.

We are studying afferent transmission from a mechanoafferent, B21, to a follower, B8. During motor programs, afferent transmission is regulated so that it does not always occur. Afferent transmission is eliminated when spike propagation in B21 fails, i.e., when spike initiation is inhibited in one output region-B21's lateral process. Spike initiation in the lateral process is inhibited by the B52 and B4/5 cells. Individual B52 and B4/5-induced inhibitory postsynaptic potentials (IPSPs) in B21 differ. For example, the peak amplitude of a B4/5-induced IPSP is four times the amplitude of a B52 IPSP. Nevertheless, when interneurons fire in bursts at physiological (i.e., low) frequencies, afferent transmission is most effectively reduced by B52. Although individual B52 induced IPSPs are small, they have a long time constant and summate at low firing frequencies. Once IPSPs summate, they effectively block afferent transmission. In contrast, individual B4/5-induced IPSPs have a relatively short time constant and do not summate at low frequencies. B52 and B4/5 therefore differ in that once synaptic input from B52 becomes effective, afferent transmission is continuously inhibited. In contrast, periods of B4/5 induced inhibition are interspersed with relatively long intervals in which inhibition does not occur. Consequently, the probability that afferent transmission will be inhibited is low. In conclusion, it is widely recognized that afferent transmission can be regulated by synaptic input. Our experiments are, however, unusual in that they relate specific characteristics of postsynaptic potentials to functional inhibition. In particular we demonstrate the potential importance of the IPSP time constant.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
C. G. Evans, T. Kang, and E. C. Cropper
Selective Spike Propagation in the Central Processes of an Invertebrate Neuron
J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2008; 100(5): 2940 - 2947.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2004 by the The American Physiological Society.