JN Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (October 15, 2008). doi:10.1152/jn.90278.2008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
100/6/3185    most recent
90278.2008v1
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 Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Friedman, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Roe, A. W
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Friedman, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Roe, A. W
Submitted on February 18, 2008
Revised on August 6, 2008
Accepted on October 10, 2008

Responses of areas 3b and 1 in anesthetized squirrel monkeys to single and dual site stimulation of the digits

Robert Mark Friedman1*, Li Min Chen1, and Anna W Roe1

1 Vanderbilt University

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: robert.friedman{at}vanderbilt.edu.

Stimulation of the skin evokes topographically organized activation in somatosensory cortex. However this representation is context dependent, since a different cortical topography is observed in area 3b when stimulated with complex tactile stimuli that evoke the von Bekesy (1960, 1967) funneling illusion (Chen et al. 2003). Here we report on the population responses, as observed with intrinsic optical imaging, of area 1 and area 3b in the anesthetized squirrel monkey to pressure indentation of distal finger pads. Individual finger pad stimulation revealed that area 1 exhibited a smaller magnification factor than 3b as evidenced by a smaller area of activation elicited by distal finger pad stimulation. Effects of paired finger pad stimulation produced largely similar effects in area 1 and area 3b. Paired finger pad stimulation produced reductions in the area of digit activation in area 1 suggesting the presence of lateral inhibition and funneling of information in area 1. Suppressive effects were stronger for paired stimulations at adjacent than non-adjacent sites. Single unit recordings revealed a mixture of either a summation or a suppression of the response, to paired finger stimulation when compared to single finger pad stimulation of the primary digit. However, the average population response showed that paired finger pad stimulation resulted in response suppression. Based on these studies and previous studies, we suggest the presence of at least three distinct ranges of lateral inhibition in areas 3b and 1.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the The American Physiological Society.