Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Neuroscience Bulletin logoLink to Neuroscience Bulletin
. 2010 Oct 8;26(5):371–380. doi: 10.1007/s12264-010-0520-4

Intracellular and current source density analysis of pretectal input to the optic tectum of the frog

青蛙前视盖与视顶盖间神经传导的细胞内记录和电流源密度分析

Xiao-Hong Li 1,2,✉, Hong-Jian Kang 1,3, Mao-Lin Xu 2, Nobuyoshi Mastumoto 1
PMCID: PMC5560352  PMID: 20882063

Abstract

Objective

Electrophysiological examination of the ipsilateral pretectotectal projection has proved that pretectal cells elicit strong suppressive responses to the ipsilateral tectum. However, the neural mechanisms underlying the contralateral pretectotectal prejection are still obscure. The present study aimed to examine the synaptic nature of pretectal nuclei and contralateral tectal cells, and to demonstrate the spatiotemporal pattern of neuronal activity in the 2 main brain structures.

Methods

Intracellular recording and current source density (CSD) analysis were used to test the complexity of neuronal mechanism of pretectotectal information transfer.

Results

The pretectal stimulation elicited only one type of response on the contralateral tectum, the inhibitory postsynaptic potential (IPSP). The majority of contra-induced IPSPs were assumed to be polysynaptically driven. In the CSD analysis, only one sink with short latency was observed in each profile. The ipsilateral projection produced a prominent monosynaptic sink in layer 8 of tectum. Recipient neurons were located in layers 6 and 7 of tectum. The result confirmed former findings from ipsilateral intracellular recordings.

Conclusion

These results suggest the following neuronal circuit: afferents from the pretectal nuclei broadly inhibit both tectal neuron, and since no second sink occurs in tectal layers, the pretectotectal excitatory afferents probably do not extend over the whole tectum, but are within limited state. The results of intracellular recording and CSD analysis further provide evidence of how pretectal afferent activity flows within the tectal laminae.

Keywords: intracellular recording, current source density analysis, optic tectum, frog

References

  • [1].Antal M., Matsumoto N., Szekely G. Tectal neurons of the frog: intracellular recording and labeling with cobalt electrodes. J Comp Neurol. 1986;246:238–253. doi: 10.1002/cne.902460208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [2].Arbib M.A., Cobas A. Prey-catching and predator avoidance. In: Arbib M.A., Ewert J.P., editors. Visual Structures and Integrated Functions. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Verlag; 1991. pp. 139–166. [Google Scholar]
  • [3].Ewert J.P. Tectal mechanisms that underlie prey-catching and avoidance behaviors in toads. In: Vanegas H., editor. Comparative Neurology of the Optic Tectum. New York: Plenum Press; 1984. pp. 247–416. [Google Scholar]
  • [4].Ewert J.P., Matsumoto N., Schwippert W.W. Morphological identification of prey-selective neurons in the grass frog’s optic tectum. Naturwissenschaften. 1985;72:661–662. doi: 10.1007/BF00497442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [5].Ewert J.P., Buxbaum-Conradi H., Dreisvogt F., Glagow M., Merkel-Harff C., Rottgen A., et al. Neural modulation of visuomotor functions underlying prey-catching behavior. In anurans: perception, attention, motor performance, learning. Comp Biochem Physiol (A) 2001;128(3):417–461. doi: 10.1016/s1095-6433(00)00333-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [6].Grüsser O.J., Grüsser-Cornehls U. Neurophysiology of the anuran visual system. In: Llinas R., Precht W., editors. Frog neurobiology. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer-Verlag; 1976. pp. 298–385. [Google Scholar]
  • [7].King J.R., Comer C.M. Visually elicited turning behavior in Rana pipiens: Comparative organization and neural control of escape and prey capture. J Comp Physiol (A) 1996;178:293–305. doi: 10.1007/BF00193968. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • [8].Matsumoto N., Bando T. Excitatory synaptic potentials and morphological classification of tectal neurons of the frog. Brain Res. 1980;192:39–48. doi: 10.1016/0006-8993(80)91006-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [9].Matsumoto N., Schiwippert W.W., Ewert J.P. Intracellular activity of morphological identified neurons of the grass frog’s optic tectum in response to moving configurational visual stimuli. J Comp Physiol. 1986;159:721–739. doi: 10.1007/BF00603726. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • [10].Székely G., Lázár G. Cellular and synaptic architecture of the optic tectum. In: Llinas R., Precht W., editors. Frog neurobiology. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer-Verlag; 1976. pp. 407–437. [Google Scholar]
  • [11].Lázár G. Structure and connections of the optic tectum. In: Vanegas H.H., editor. Comparative Neurology of the Optic Tectum. New York: Plenum Press; 1984. [Google Scholar]
  • [12].Lázár G. Cellular architecture and connectivity of the frog’s optic tectum and pretectum. In: Ewert J.P., Arbib M.A., editors. Visuomotor Coordination. New York: Plenum Press; 1989. [Google Scholar]
  • [13].Matsumoto N. Morphological and physiological studies of tectal and pretectal neurons in the frog. In: Ewert J.P., Arbib M.A., editors. Visuomotor coordination: amphibians, comparisons, models, and robots. New York: Plenum Press; 1989. pp. 201–222. [Google Scholar]
  • [14].Buxbaum-Conradi H., Ewert J.P. Pretecto-tectal influences I. What the toad’s pretectum tells its tectum: an antidromic stimulation/recording study. J Comp Physiol. 1995;176:169–180. doi: 10.1007/BF00239920. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • [15].Lázár G., Pal E. Neuronal connections through the posterior commissure in the frog Rana esculenta. Brain Res. 1999;39(3):369–374. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [16].Ingle D. Disinhibition of tectal neurons by pretectal lesions in the frog. Science. 1973;180:422–424. doi: 10.1126/science.180.4084.422. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [17].Kondrashev S.L., Dimentman A.M. Role of dorsal thalamus in the organization of visually-mediated behavior in amphibians. In: Orlov O.Y., editor. Mechanisms of vision of animals. Moscow: Nauka; 1978. [Google Scholar]
  • [18].Kang H.J., Li X.H. An intracellular study of pretectal influence on the optic tectum of the frog, Rana catesbeiana. Neurosci Bull. 2007;23(2):113–118. doi: 10.1007/s12264-007-0016-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [19].Haberly L.B., Shepherd G.M. Current-density analysis of summed evoked potentials in opossum prepyriform cortex. Neurophysiology. 1973;36:789–802. doi: 10.1152/jn.1973.36.4.789. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [20].Mitzdorf U., 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. 1978;33:371–394. doi: 10.1007/BF00235560. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [21].Mitzdorf U., 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 Neurol. 1979;187:71–84. doi: 10.1002/cne.901870105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [22].Mitzdorf U., Singer W. Monocular activation of visual cortex in normal and monocularly deprived cats: An analysis of evoked potentials. Physiology. 1980;304:203–220. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1980.sp013320. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [23].Freeman B., Singer W. Direct and indirect visual inputs to superficial layers of cat superior colliculus: A current source-density analysis of electrically evoked potentials. Neurophysiology. 1983;49:1075–1091. doi: 10.1152/jn.1983.49.5.1075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [24].Mitzdorf U. Current source-density method and application in cat cerebral cortex: Investigation of evoked potentials and EEG phenomena. Physiol Rev. 1985;65:37–100. doi: 10.1152/physrev.1985.65.1.37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [25].Luhmann H.J., Greuel J.M., Singer W. Horizontal interactions in cat striate cortex: II. A current source-density analysis. Eur J Neurosci. 1990;2:358–368. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.1990.tb00427.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [26].Kenan-Vaknin G., Teyler T.J. Laminar pattern of synaptic activity in rat primary visual cortex: Comparison of in vivo and in vitro studies employing the current source density analysis. Brain Res. 1994;636:37–48. doi: 10.1016/0006-8993(94)91421-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [27].Stone J.J., Freeman J.A. Synaptic organization of the pigeon’s optic tectum: A golgi and current source-density analysis. Brain Res. 1971;27:203–221. doi: 10.1016/0006-8993(71)90249-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [28].Vanegas H., Williams B., Freeman J.A. Responses to stimulation of marginal fibers in the teleostean optic tectum. Exp Brain Res. 1979;34:335–349. doi: 10.1007/BF00235677. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [29].Freeman J.A., Schmidt J.T., Oswald R.E. Effects of α-bungarotoxin on retinotectal synaptic transmission in the goldfish and the toad. Neuroscience. 1980;5:929–942. doi: 10.1016/0306-4522(80)90161-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [30].Chung S.H., Bliss T.V.P., Keating M.J. The synaptic organization of optic afferents in the amphibian tectum. London: Proceedings of the Royal Society (B); 1974. pp. 421–447. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [31].Freeman J.A. Possible regulatory function of acetylcholine receptor in maintenance of retinotectal synapses. Nature. 1977;269:218–222. doi: 10.1038/269218a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [32].Nakagawa H., Miyazaki H., Matsumoto N. Principal neuronal organization in the frog optic tectum revealed by a current source density analysis. Vis Neurosci. 1997;14:263–275. doi: 10.1017/S0952523800011408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [33].Mitzdorf U. The physiological causes of VEP: current source density analysis of electrically and visually evoked potentials. In: Cracco R.Q., Bodis-Wolliner I., editors. Evoked potentials. New York: Alan R. Liss; 1986. [Google Scholar]
  • [34].Nicholson C. Theretical analysis of field potentials in anisotropic ensembles of neuronal elements. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1973;20:278–288. doi: 10.1109/TBME.1973.324192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [35].Guedes R.C., Tsurudome K., Matsumoto N. Spreading depression in vivo potentiates electrically-driven responses in frog optic tectum. Brain Res. 2005;1036:109–114. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2004.12.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [36].Kozicz T., Lázár G. The origin of tectal NPY immunopositive fibers in the frog. Brain Res. 1994;635:345–348. doi: 10.1016/0006-8993(94)91460-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [37].Ewert J.P., Schürg-Pfeiffer E., 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. 1996;47(1–4):89–111. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Neuroscience Bulletin are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES