PubMed1987
The aim of this study was to extend the anatomical study of the corticoreticular organization in the monkey by means of microelectrophysiological techniques. Considering the relatively modest projection (see companion paper, Wiesendanger and Wiesendanger, '87), it was surprising to see that over 70% of the investigated LRN neurons were influenced from at least one cortical stimulation site. Many neurons responded, however, with long latencies suggesting an indirect transmission line. In line with the anatomical tracing study, most short-latency responses were obtained from the motor cortex. Postcentral cortex and the SMA were, in general, less effective sites for evoking responses in the LRN. LRN neurons with similar cortical inputs tended to be clustered together suggesting that the corticoreticular projection is discretely organized with an "intermingled somatotopy". The majority of the 87 tested LRN neurons were not reactive to any peripheral stimulus (33%) or responded only to nociceptive peripheral stimulation (31%). Very large receptive fields were seen in 8% of the units. However, a significant proportion of LRN neurons (10%) had restricted receptive fields and reacted to gentle cutaneous stimuli, and others (17%) responded to discrete passive rotations of one or more joints. There was often a somatotopical correspondence between the peripheral and the cortical inputs. It is concluded that the LRN in monkeys is under the influence of the motor cortex, which, however, may be exerted to a major extent via indirect pathways. The electrophysiological data suggest a discrete rather than a diffuse relationship with the LRN.