These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Somatotopic organization and response characteristics of dorsal horn neurons in the cervical spinal cord of the cat.
    Author: Sorkin LS, Ferrington DG, Willis WD.
    Journal: Somatosens Res; 1986; 3(4):323-38. PubMed ID: 3775153.
    Abstract:
    Somatotopic organization was examined for 203 dorsal horn cells in spinal segments C6 and C7 of chloralose-anesthetized cats. The ventral paw and toe area were represented medial to a smaller area with input from the dorsal paw. Representation of the ventromedial forelimb was rostral to that of the paw, while the shoulder and dorsolateral limb were represented caudal to it. In 13 out of 22 electrode tracks in which three or more cells were found, the location of receptive fields progressively changed for successively recorded cells. Receptive fields on the paw were closer together and overlapped more than those on the proximal limb. Receptive fields that included glabrous skin were found for only 7 of 203 cells; all were located in the medial third of the C7 dorsal horn. It appears that glabrous skin is underrepresented in the dorsal horn; this may be compensated for a higher levels by input from the lemniscal system. The response characteristics of 172 dorsal horn neurons were examined. Of these units, 135 (78%) had cutaneous receptive fields. An additional 37 cells (22%) responded to manipulation of muscle or tendon and were classified as deep (D) cells. The cells with cutaneous receptive fields were classified as low-threshold (LT) cells (38%), high-threshold (HT) cells (20%), and wide-dynamic-range (WDR) cells (20%). Alternatively, using cluster analysis, 57 cells with cutaneous receptive fields were classified as one of five mechanical types. Type 1 cells responded primarily to low-threshold input, while the other four types fired in characteristic patterns in response to a combination of innocuous and noxious stimuli. LT cells were located more superficially in the spinal cord than the other classes; their average depth below the cord surface was 1.9 mm. WDR cells (mean = 2.1 mm) were located below the LT cells and above the HT and D cells (mean = 2.6 mm).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]