Biomedical subjects

Arun P Sripati

Publications and source records attributed to Arun P Sripati.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

A continuum mechanical model of mechanoreceptive afferent responses to indented spatial patterns.

Information about the spatial structure of tactile stimuli is conveyed by slowly adapting type 1 (SA1) and rapidly adapting (RA) afferents innervating the skin. Here, we investigate how the spatial properties of the stimulus shape the afferent response. To that end, we present an analytical framework to characterize SA1 and RA responses to a wide variety of spatial patterns indented into the skin. This framework comprises a model of the tissue deformation produced by any three-dimensional indented spatial pattern, along with an expression that converts the deformation at the receptor site into a neural response. We evaluated 15 candidate variables for the relevant receptor deformation and found that physical quantities closely related to local membrane stretch were most predictive of the observed afferent responses. The main outcome of this study is an accurate working model of SA1 and RA afferent responses to indented spatial patterns.

Action Potentials↗

PubMed2006

Spatiotemporal receptive fields of peripheral afferents and cortical area 3b and 1 neurons in the primate somatosensory system.

Neurons in area 3b have been previously characterized using linear spatial receptive fields with spatially separated excitatory and inhibitory regions. Here, we expand on this work by examining the relationship between excitation and inhibition along both spatial and temporal dimensions and comparing these properties across anatomical areas. To that end, we characterized the spatiotemporal receptive fields (STRFs) of 32 slowly adapting type 1 (SA1) and 21 rapidly adapting peripheral afferents and of 138 neurons in cortical areas 3b and 1 using identical random probe stimuli. STRFs of peripheral afferents consist of a rapidly appearing excitatory region followed by an in-field (replacing) inhibitory region. STRFs of SA1 afferents also exhibit flanking (surround) inhibition that can be attributed to skin mechanics. Cortical STRFs had longer time courses and greater inhibition compared with peripheral afferent STRFs, with less replacing inhibition in area 1 neurons compared with area 3b neurons. The greater inhibition observed in cortical STRFs point to the existence of underlying intracortical mechanisms. In addition, the shapes of excitatory and inhibitory lobes of both peripheral and cortical STRFs remained mostly stable over time, suggesting that their feature selectivity remains constant throughout the time course of the neural response. Finally, the gradual increase in the proportion of surround inhibition from the periphery to area 3b to area 1, and the concomitant decrease in response linearity of these neurons indicate the emergence of increasingly feature-specific response properties along the somatosensory pathway.

Afferent Pathways↗

PubMed2006

Dynamic gain changes during attentional modulation.

Attention causes a multiplicative effect on firing rates of cortical neurons without affecting their selectivity (Motter, 1993; McAdams & Maunsell, 1999a) or the relationship between the spike count mean and variance (McAdams & Maunsell, 1999b). We analyzed attentional modulation of the firing rates of 144 neurons in the secondary somatosensory cortex (SII) of two monkeys trained to switch their attention between a tactile pattern recognition task and a visual task. We found that neurons in SII cortex also undergo a predominantly multiplicative modulation in firing rates without affecting the ratio of variance to mean firing rate (i.e., the Fano factor). Furthermore, both additive and multiplicative components of attentional modulation varied dynamically during the stimulus presentation. We then used a standard conductance-based integrate-and-fire model neuron to ascertain which mechanisms might account for a multiplicative increase in firing rate without affecting the Fano factor. Six mechanisms were identified as biophysically plausible ways that attention could modify the firing rate: spike threshold, firing rate adaptation, excitatory input synchrony, synchrony between all inputs, membrane leak resistance, and reset potential. Of these, only a change in spike threshold or in firing rate adaptation affected model firing rates in a manner compatible with the observed neural data. The results indicate that only a limited number of biophysical mechanisms can account for observed attentional modulation.

Action Potentials↗