Article

Long-Range Neuronal Circuits Underlying the Interaction between Sensory and Motor Cortex

Janelia Farm Research Campus, HHMI, 19700 Helix Drive, Ashburn, VA 20147, USA.
Neuron (Impact Factor: 15.98). 10/2011; 72(1):111-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.07.029
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In the rodent vibrissal system, active sensation and sensorimotor integration are mediated in part by connections between barrel cortex and vibrissal motor cortex. Little is known about how these structures interact at the level of neurons. We used Channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2) expression, combined with anterograde and retrograde labeling, to map connections between barrel cortex and pyramidal neurons in mouse motor cortex. Barrel cortex axons preferentially targeted upper layer (L2/3, L5A) neurons in motor cortex; input to neurons projecting back to barrel cortex was particularly strong. Barrel cortex input to deeper layers (L5B, L6) of motor cortex, including neurons projecting to the brainstem, was weak, despite pronounced geometric overlap of dendrites with axons from barrel cortex. Neurons in different layers received barrel cortex input within stereotyped dendritic domains. The cortico-cortical neurons in superficial layers of motor cortex thus couple motor and sensory signals and might mediate sensorimotor integration and motor learning.

3 Followers
 · 
172 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Moving and interacting with the world requires that the sensory and motor systems share information, but while some information about tactile events is preserved during sensorimotor transfer the spatial specificity of this information is unknown. Afferent inhibition studies, in which corticospinal excitability is inhibited when a single tactile stimulus is presented before a transcranial magnetic stimulation pulse over the motor cortex, offer contradictory results regarding the sensory-to-motor transfer of spatial information. Here, we combined the techniques of afferent inhibition and tactile repetition suppression (RS: the decreased neurophysiological response following double stimulation of the same vs. different fingers) to investigate whether topographic information is preserved in the sensory-to-motor transfer in humans. We developed a double afferent inhibition paradigm to examine both spatial (same vs. different finger) and temporal (short vs. long delay) aspects of sensorimotor interactions. Two consecutive electrocutaneous stimuli (separated by either 30 or 125 ms) were delivered to either the same or different fingers on the left hand (i.e., index finger stimulated twice or middle finger stimulated before index finger). Information about which fingers were stimulated was reflected in the size of the motor responses in a time-constrained manner: corticospinal excitability was modulated differently by same and different finger stimulation only when the two stimuli were separated by the short delay (p=.004). We demonstrate that the well-known response of the somatosensory cortices following repetitive stimulation is mirrored in the motor cortex and that corticospinal excitability is modulated as a function of the temporal and spatial relationship between afferent stimuli.
    European Journal of Neuroscience 03/2015; · 3.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Primary motor (M1) and secondary somatosensory (S2) cortices, although anatomically and functionally distinct, share an intriguing cellular component: corticospinal neurons (CSP) in layer 5B. Here, we investigated the long-range circuits of CSPs in mouse forelimb-M1 and S2. We found that interareal projections (S2 → M1 and M1 → S2) monosynaptically excited pyramidal neurons across multiple layers, including CSPs. Area-specific differences were observed in the relative strengths of inputs to subsets of CSPs and other cell types, but the general patterns were similar. Furthermore, subcellular mapping of the dendritic distributions of these corticocortical excitatory synapses onto CSPs in both areas also showed similar patterns. Because layer 5B is particularly thick in M1, but not S2, we studied M1-CSPs at different cortical depths, quantifying their dendritic morphology and mapping inputs from additional cortical (M2, contralateral M1, and local layer 2/3) and thalamic (VL nucleus) sources. These results indicated that CSPs exhibit area-specific modifications on an otherwise conserved synaptic organization, and that different afferents innervate M1-CSP dendritic domains in a source-specific manner. In the cervical spinal cord, CSP axons from S2 and M1 partly converged on middle layers, but S2-CSP axons extended further dorsally, and M1-CSP axons ventrally. Thus, our findings identify many shared features in the circuits of M1 and S2 and show that these areas communicate via mutual projections that give each area monosynaptic access to the other area's CSPs. These interareally yoked CSP circuits may enable M1 and S2 to operate in a coordinated yet differentiated manner in the service of sensorimotor integration. Copyright © 2015 the authors 0270-6474/15/352959-16$15.00/0.
    The Journal of Neuroscience : The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience 02/2015; 35(7):2959-2974. DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4287-14.2015 · 6.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Intelligence is our ability to learn appropriate responses to new stimuli and situations. Neurons in association cortex are thought to be essential for this ability. During learning these neurons become tuned to relevant features and start to represent them with persistent activity during memory delays. This learning process is not well understood. Here we develop a biologically plausible learning scheme that explains how trial-and-error learning induces neuronal selectivity and working memory representations for task-relevant information. We propose that the response selection stage sends attentional feedback signals to earlier processing levels, forming synaptic tags at those connections responsible for the stimulus-response mapping. Globally released neuromodulators then interact with tagged synapses to determine their plasticity. The resulting learning rule endows neural networks with the capacity to create new working memory representations of task relevant information as persistent activity. It is remarkably generic: it explains how association neurons learn to store task-relevant information for linear as well as non-linear stimulus-response mappings, how they become tuned to category boundaries or analog variables, depending on the task demands, and how they learn to integrate probabilistic evidence for perceptual decisions.
    PLoS Computational Biology 03/2015; 11:e1004060. DOI:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004060 · 4.83 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Download
49 Downloads
Available from
Nov 20, 2014