On and off channels of the frog optic tectum revealed by current source density analysis

Journal of Neurophysiology

Volumn 80, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 1886-1899

  Nakagawa, Hideki ^a   Matsumoto, Nobuyoshi ^a  

^a KYUSHU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; ELECTROSTIMULATION; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; FACILITATION; FROG; NERVE CONDUCTION; NONHUMAN; OPTIC TECTUM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYNAPTIC TRANSMISSION;

EID: 0031794889     PISSN: 00223077     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/jn.1998.80.4.1886     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. AHO, A.-C., DONNER, K., HELENIUS, S., OLESEN LARSEN, L., AND REUTER, T. Visual performance of the toad (Bufo bufo) at low light levels: retinal ganglion cell responses and prey-catching accuracy. J. Comp. Physiol. [A] 172: 671-682, 1993a.
2. AHO, A.-C., DONNER, K., AND REUTER, T. Retinal origin of the temperature effect on absolute visual sensitivity in frogs. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 463: 501-521, 1993b.
3. ANTAL, M., MATSUMOTO, N., AND SZÉKELY, G. Tectal neurons of the frog: intracellular recording and labeling with cobalt electrodes. J. Comp. Neurol. 246: 238-253, 1986.
4. ARIELI, A., STERKIN, A., GRINVALD, A., AND AERTSEN, A. Dynamics of ongoing activity: explanation of the large variability in evoked cortical responses. Science 273: 1868-1871, 1996.
5. BROWN, W. T. AND INGLE, D. Receptive field changes produced in frog thalamic units by lesions of the optic tectum. Brain Res. 59: 405-409, 1973.
6. ENROTH-CUGELL, C. AND ROBSON, J. G. The contrast sensitivity of retinal ganglion cells of the cat. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 187: 517-552, 1966.
7. EWERT, J.-P. Aktivierung der Verhaltensfolge beim Beutefang der Erdkröte (bufo bufo L.) durch elektrische Mittelhirnreizung. Z. Vgl. Physiol. 54: 455-481, 1967.
8. EWERT, J.-P. Der Einfluß von Zwischenhirndefekten auf die Visuomotorik im Beute- und Fluchtverhalten der Erdkröte (Bufo bufo L.). Z. Vgl. Physiol. 61: 41-70, 1968.
9. EWERT, J.-P. Tectal mechanisms that underlie prey-catching and avoidance behaviors in toads. In: Comparative Neurology of the Optic Tectum, edited by H. Vanegas. New York: Plenum, 1984, p. 247-416.
10. EWERT, J.-P. The release of visual behavior in toads: stages of parallel/ hierarchical information processing. In: Visuomotor Coordination, edited by J.-P. Ewert and M. A. Arbib. New York: Plenum, 1989, p. 39-120.
11. EWERT, J.-P. AND REHN, B. Wirksamkeit optischer Reizmuster beim Auslösen des Fluchtverhaltens der Wechselkröte. Naturwissenschaften 55: 351, 1968.
12. EWERT, J.-P. AND REHN, B. Quantitative Analyse der Reiz-Reaktionsbeziehungen bei visuellem Auslösen des Fluchtverhaltens der Wechselkröte (bufo viridis Laur.). Behaviour 35: 212-234, 1969.
13. EWERT, J.-P., SCHÜRG-PFEIFFER, E., AND SCHWIPPERT, W. W. Influence of pretectal lesions on tectal responses to visual stimulation in anurans: field potential, single neuron and behavior analyses. Acta Biol. Hung. 47: 89-111, 1996.
14. EWERT, J.-P. AND TRAUD, R. Releasing stimuli for antipredator behaviour in the common toad Bufo bufo (L.). Behaviour 68: 170-180, 1979.
15. FREEMAN, B. AND SINGER, W. Direct and indirect visual inputs to superficial layers of cat superior colliculus: a current source-density analysis of electrically evoked potentials. J. Neurophysiol. 49: 1075-1091, 1983.
16. FREEMAN, J. A. Possible regulatory function of acetylcholine receptor in maintenance of retinotectal synapses. Nature 269: 218-222, 1977.
17. FREEMAN, J. A. AND NICHOLSON, C. Experimental optimization of current source-density technique for anuran cerebellum. J. Neurophysiol. 38: 369-382, 1975.
18. FREEMAN, J. A., SCHMIDT, J. T., AND OSWALD, R. E. Effect of α-bungarotoxin on retinotectal synaptic transmission in the goldfish and the toad. Neuroscience 5: 929-942, 1980.
19. GAZE, R. M. AND KEATING, M. J. The depth distribution of visual units in the tectum of the frog following regeneration of the optic nerve (Abstract). J. Physiol. (Lond.) 200: 128-129P, 1969.
20. GERNERT, M. AND EWERT, J.-P. Cholinergic, gabaergic, and dopaminergic influences on visually evoked field potentials in the superficial optic tectum of Bufo marinus. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A Physiol. 112A: 387-401, 1995.
21. GIVRE, S. J., AREZZO, J. C., AND SCHROEDER, C. E. Effects of wavelength on the timing and laminar distribution of illuminance-evoked activity in macaque V1. Vis. Neurosci. 12: 229-239, 1995.
22. GRUBERG, E. R. AND LETTVIN, J. Y. Anatomy and physiology of a binocular system in the frog Rana pipiens. Brain Res. 192: 313-325, 1980.
23. GRÜSSER, O.-J. AND GRÜSSER-CORNEHLS, U. Neurophysiology of the anuran visual system. In: Frog Neurobiology, edited by R. Llinás and W. Precht. New York: Springer Verlag, 1976, p. 297-385.
24. HUGHES, T. A light- and electron-microscopic investigation of the optic tectum of the frog, Rana pipiens. I. The retinal axons. Vis. Neurosci. 4: 499-518, 1990.
25. INGLE, D. Brain mechanisms and vision: subcortical systems. Science 168: 1493-1494, 1970.
26. INGLE, D. Disinhibition of tectal neurons by pretectal lesions in the frog. Science 180: 422-424, 1973a.
27. INGLE, D. Two visual systems in the frog. Science 181: 1053-1055, 1973b.
28. INGLE, D. Focal attention in the frog : behavioral and physiological correlates. Science 188: 1033-1035, 1975.
29. INGLE, D. Behavioral correlates of central visual function in anurans. In: Frog Neurobiology, edited by R. Llinás and W. Precht. New York: Springer Verlag, 1976, p. 435-451.
30. KAPLAN, E. AND SHAPLEY, R. M. The primate retina contains two types of ganglion cells, with high and low contrast sensitivity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83: 2755-2757, 1986.
31. KOZICZ, T. AND LÁZÁR, G. The origin of tectal NPY immunopositive fibers in the frog. Brain Res. 635: 345-348, 1994.
32. LARA, R., ARBIB, M. A., AND CROMARTY, A. S. The role of the tectal column in facilitation of amphibian prey-catching behavior: a neural model. J. Neurosci. 2: 521-530, 1982.
33. LÁZÁR, G. AND SZÉKELY, G. Distribution of optic terminals in the different optic centres of the frog. Brain Res. 16: 1-14, 1969.
34. LETTVIN, J. Y., MATURANA, H. R., MCCULLOCH, W. S., AND PITTS, W. H. What the frog's eye tells the frog's brain. Proc. IRE 47: 1940-1951, 1959.
35. LIAW, J.-S. AND ARBIB, M. A. A neural network model for response to looming objects by frog and toad. In: Visual Structures and Integrated Functions, edited by M. A. Arbib and J.-P. Ewert. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1991, p. 167-180.
36. MATURANA, H. R., LETTVIN, J. Y., MCCULLOCH, W. S., AND PITTS, W. H. Anatomy and physiology of vision in the frog (Rana pipiens). J. Gen. Physiol. 43: 129-175, 1960.
37. MITZDORF, U. Current source-density method and application in cat cerebral cortex: investigation of evoked potentials and EEG phenomena. Physiol. Rev. 65: 37-100, 1985.
38. MITZDORF, U. The physiological causes of VEP: current source density analysis of electrically and visually evoked potentials. In: Evoked Potentials, edited by R. Q. Cracco and I. Bodis-Wolliner. New York: Liss, 1986, p. 141-154.
39. MITZDORF, U. AND SINGER, W. Laminar segregation of afferents to lateral geniculate nucleus of the cat: an analysis of current source density. J. Neurophysiol. 40: 1227-1244, 1977.
40. MITZDORF, U. AND SINGER, W. Prominent excitatory pathways in the cat visual cortex (A17 and A18): a current source density analysis of electrically evoked potentials. Exp. Brain Res. 33: 371-394, 1978.
41. MITZDORF, U. AND SINGER, W. Excitatory synaptic ensemble properties in the visual cortex of the macaque monkey: a current source density analysis of electrically evoked potentials. J. Comp. Neural. 187: 71-84, 1979.
42. MITZDORF, U. AND SINGER, W. Monocular activation of visual cortex in normal and monocularly deprived cats: an analysis of evoked potentials. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 304: 203-220, 1980.
43. NAKAGAWA, H., MIYAZAKI, H., AND MATSUMOTO, N. Principal neuronal organization in the frog optic tectum revealed by a current source density analysis. Vis. Neurosci. 14: 263-275, 1997.
44. NICHOLSON, C. Theoretical analysis of field potentials in anisotropic ensembles of neuronal elements. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 20: 278-288, 1973.
45. NICHOLSON, C. AND FREEMAN, J. A. Theory of current source-density analysis and determination of conductivity tensor for anuran cerebellum. J. Neurophysiol. 38: 356-368, 1975.
46. PIGAREV, J. N., ZENKIN, G. M., AND GIRMAN, S. B. The detectors of the frog retina. Responses in unrestrained frogs. Sechenov J. Physiol. USSR 57: 1448-1458, 1971.
47. POTTER, H. D. Terminal arborizations of retinotectal axons in the bullfrog. J. Comp. Neural. 144: 269-284, 1972.
48. RAPPELSBERGER, P., POCKBERGER, H., AND PETSCHE, H. Current source density analysis: methods and application to simultaneously recorded field potentials of the rabbit's visual cortex. Pflügers Arch. 389: 159-170, 1981.
49. RODRIGUEZ, R. AND HABERLY, L. B. Analysis of synaptic events in the opossum piriform cortex with improved current source-density techniques. J. Neurophysiol. 61: 702-718, 1989.
50. SCALIA, F. The optic pathway of the frog : nuclear organization and connections. In: Frog Neurobiology, edited by R. Llinás and W. Precht. New York: Springer Verlag, 1976, p. 386-406.
51. SCHIFF, W. Perception of impending collision. Psychol. Monogr. 79: No. 604, 1965.
52. SCHNEIDER, D. Das Gesichtsfeld und der Fixiervorgang bei einheimischen Anuren. Z. Vgl. Physiol. 36: 147-164, 1954.
53. SCHWIPPERT, W. W., BENEKE, T. W., AND EWERT, J.-P. Pretecto-tectal influences II. How retinal and pretectal inputs to the toad's superficial tectum interact: a study of electrically evoked field potentials. J. Comp. Physiol. [A] 176: 181-192, 1995.
54. SCHWIPPERT, W. W., BENEKE, T. W., AND EWERT, J.-P. Disproportionate distribution of field potentials across the toad's tectal visual map in response to diffuse light ON and OFF stimulations. Vision Res. 36: 19-26, 1996.
55. SHAPLEY, R. AND PERRY, V. H. Cat and monkey retinal ganglion cells and their visual functional roles. Trends Neurosci. 9: 229-235, 1986.
56. SZÉKELY, G. AND LÁZÁR, G. Cellular and synaptic architecture of the optic tectum. In: Frog Neurobiology, edited by R. Llinás and W. Precht. New York: Springer Verlag, 1976, p. 407-434.
57. VAKNIN, G., DISCENNA, P. G., AND TEYLER, T. J. A method for calculating current source density (CSD) analysis without resorting to recording sites outside the sampling volume. J. Neurosci. Methods 24: 131-135, 1988.
58. VANEGAS, H., WILLIAMS, B., AND FREEMAN, J. A. Responses to stimulation of marginal fibers in the teleostean optic tectum. Exp. Brain Res. 34: 335-349, 1979.
59. VAN ESSEN, D. C. AND GALLANT, J. L. Neural mechanisms of form and motion processing in the primate visual system. Neuron 13: 1-10, 1994.
60. VARJÚ, D. AND PICKERING, S. G. Delayed responses of ganglion cells in the frog retina. Kybernetik 6: 112-119, 1969.
61. WÄSSLE, H., PEICHL, L., AND BOYCOTT, B. B. Morphology and topography of ON- and OFF-alpna cells in the cat retina. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 212: 157-175, 1981.
62. WITPAARD, J. AND KEURS, H.E.D.J.T. A reclassification of retinal ganglion cells in the frog, based upon tectal endings and response properties. Vision Res. 15: 1333-1338, 1975.