Notes on inhibition in LGN. Niebur, E. 1997. bibtex @unpublished{ Niebur97b,
author = {Niebur, E.},
title = {Notes on inhibition in LGN},
year = {1997},
downloads = {Niebur97b.pdf; },
full_text = {From: Ernst Niebur <niebur@russell.mb.jhu.edu>; To: rinzel@helix.nih.gov
do you know if (ref'ces) someone has studied the role of LGN circuitry
( particularly, GABAergic influences: interneurons and recticularis
neurons) on sensory throughput in thalamus? on RFs? etc‥‥ studied=
expts and/or computational models? Especially, with biophysically-based
(HH-type cells) computational models‥.
hm, that's funny, I guess if I had had this question, I would have
asked _you_ about it :) but let's see what I can remember and dig
up in my file cabinet:
A classic seems to be Wolf Singer's review (Physiol. Reviews 57(3),
386-420, 1977) which I am sure you are familiar with. He has some
paragraphs on inhibitory interactions.
Vidyasagar and Urbas (EBR 46, 157-169, 1982) and Vidyasagar(ibid,
55, 192-195, 1984) claimed that intra-LGN inhibition is responsible
for LGN orientation sensitivity (in cat). Their claim was refuted
by Soodak et al, J. Neurophysiol 58(2), 1987, 267-275 who claimed
that the small orientation bias is completely due to retinal input.
I believe that this was also Audy Leventhal's take but I forgot the
details.
More general effects of intra-LGN inhibitory circuits on receptive
field structures of LGN relay cells were studied by Norton, Holdefer
and Godwin (Brain Research 488, 341-347, 1989; ibid, 348-352) in
the tree shrew. They claim changes in receptive field center sensitivity
and signal detectability.
Interactions BETWEEN the LGN inhibitory pathways (intrageniculate
and perigeniculate) were studied by Ahlsen, Lindstrom and Lo (EBR
58: 134-143, 1985). As far as the final influence on sensory throughput
is concerned, they interpret their results as supporting gain control
mechanisms.
An anatomical paper by Weber et al (J. Comp. Neurology 289:156-164,
1989) finds that the inhibitory interneurons receive input from corticofugal
feedback (in cat). They hypothesize that this modulates (via the
activity of the inhibitory interneurons) the responses of relay cells
to input from the retina.
Finally, Funke and Worgotter (J. Physiol 485.3, 715-737, 1995) measured
the temporal structure of LGN spike trains (cat again) and suggested
an inhibitory intra-LGN circuit for the explanation of the structure.
Their functional interpretation regarding sensory throughput is that
of a NAND gate. They also did some simulations but their neuron models
were very simple.},
opten_number = {3.4.2:57},
optmonth = {July}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"aRczB2TMFzEsx2M9n","bibbaseid":"niebur-notesoninhibitioninlgn-1997","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2015-02-08T05:14:53.751Z","title":"Notes on inhibition in LGN","author_short":["Niebur, E."],"year":1997,"bibtype":"unpublished","biburl":"http://cnslab.mb.jhu.edu/niebase.bib","bibdata":{"author":["Niebur, E."],"author_short":["Niebur, E."],"bibtex":"@unpublished{ Niebur97b,\n author = {Niebur, E.},\n title = {Notes on inhibition in LGN},\n year = {1997},\n downloads = {Niebur97b.pdf; },\n full_text = {From: Ernst Niebur <niebur@russell.mb.jhu.edu>; To: rinzel@helix.nih.gov\n\tdo you know if (ref'ces) someone has studied the role of LGN circuitry\n\t( particularly, GABAergic influences: interneurons and recticularis\n\tneurons) on sensory throughput in thalamus? on RFs? etc‥‥ studied=\n\texpts and/or computational models? Especially, with biophysically-based\n\t(HH-type cells) computational models‥.\n\t\n\thm, that's funny, I guess if I had had this question, I would have\n\tasked _you_ about it :) but let's see what I can remember and dig\n\tup in my file cabinet:\n\t\n\tA classic seems to be Wolf Singer's review (Physiol. Reviews 57(3),\n\t386-420, 1977) which I am sure you are familiar with. He has some\n\tparagraphs on inhibitory interactions.\n\t\n\tVidyasagar and Urbas (EBR 46, 157-169, 1982) and Vidyasagar(ibid,\n\t55, 192-195, 1984) claimed that intra-LGN inhibition is responsible\n\tfor LGN orientation sensitivity (in cat). Their claim was refuted\n\tby Soodak et al, J. Neurophysiol 58(2), 1987, 267-275 who claimed\n\tthat the small orientation bias is completely due to retinal input.\n\tI believe that this was also Audy Leventhal's take but I forgot the\n\tdetails.\n\t\n\tMore general effects of intra-LGN inhibitory circuits on receptive\n\tfield structures of LGN relay cells were studied by Norton, Holdefer\n\tand Godwin (Brain Research 488, 341-347, 1989; ibid, 348-352) in\n\tthe tree shrew. They claim changes in receptive field center sensitivity\n\tand signal detectability.\n\t\n\tInteractions BETWEEN the LGN inhibitory pathways (intrageniculate\n\tand perigeniculate) were studied by Ahlsen, Lindstrom and Lo (EBR\n\t58: 134-143, 1985). As far as the final influence on sensory throughput\n\tis concerned, they interpret their results as supporting gain control\n\tmechanisms.\n\t\n\tAn anatomical paper by Weber et al (J. Comp. Neurology 289:156-164,\n\t1989) finds that the inhibitory interneurons receive input from corticofugal\n\tfeedback (in cat). They hypothesize that this modulates (via the\n\tactivity of the inhibitory interneurons) the responses of relay cells\n\tto input from the retina.\n\t\n\tFinally, Funke and Worgotter (J. Physiol 485.3, 715-737, 1995) measured\n\tthe temporal structure of LGN spike trains (cat again) and suggested\n\tan inhibitory intra-LGN circuit for the explanation of the structure.\n\tTheir functional interpretation regarding sensory throughput is that\n\tof a NAND gate. They also did some simulations but their neuron models\n\twere very simple.},\n opten_number = {3.4.2:57},\n optmonth = {July}\n}","bibtype":"unpublished","downloads":0,"full_text":"From: Ernst Niebur <niebur@russell.mb.jhu.edu>; To: rinzel@helix.nih.gov do you know if (ref'ces) someone has studied the role of LGN circuitry ( particularly, GABAergic influences: interneurons and recticularis neurons) on sensory throughput in thalamus? on RFs? etc‥‥ studied= expts and/or computational models? Especially, with biophysically-based (HH-type cells) computational models‥. hm, that's funny, I guess if I had had this question, I would have asked _you_ about it :) but let's see what I can remember and dig up in my file cabinet: A classic seems to be Wolf Singer's review (Physiol. Reviews 57(3), 386-420, 1977) which I am sure you are familiar with. He has some paragraphs on inhibitory interactions. Vidyasagar and Urbas (EBR 46, 157-169, 1982) and Vidyasagar(ibid, 55, 192-195, 1984) claimed that intra-LGN inhibition is responsible for LGN orientation sensitivity (in cat). Their claim was refuted by Soodak et al, J. Neurophysiol 58(2), 1987, 267-275 who claimed that the small orientation bias is completely due to retinal input. I believe that this was also Audy Leventhal's take but I forgot the details. More general effects of intra-LGN inhibitory circuits on receptive field structures of LGN relay cells were studied by Norton, Holdefer and Godwin (Brain Research 488, 341-347, 1989; ibid, 348-352) in the tree shrew. They claim changes in receptive field center sensitivity and signal detectability. Interactions BETWEEN the LGN inhibitory pathways (intrageniculate and perigeniculate) were studied by Ahlsen, Lindstrom and Lo (EBR 58: 134-143, 1985). As far as the final influence on sensory throughput is concerned, they interpret their results as supporting gain control mechanisms. An anatomical paper by Weber et al (J. Comp. Neurology 289:156-164, 1989) finds that the inhibitory interneurons receive input from corticofugal feedback (in cat). They hypothesize that this modulates (via the activity of the inhibitory interneurons) the responses of relay cells to input from the retina. Finally, Funke and Worgotter (J. Physiol 485.3, 715-737, 1995) measured the temporal structure of LGN spike trains (cat again) and suggested an inhibitory intra-LGN circuit for the explanation of the structure. Their functional interpretation regarding sensory throughput is that of a NAND gate. They also did some simulations but their neuron models were very simple.","id":"Niebur97b","key":"Niebur97b","opten_number":"3.4.2:57","optmonth":"July","title":"Notes on inhibition in LGN","type":"unpublished","year":"1997","bibbaseid":"niebur-notesoninhibitioninlgn-1997","role":"author","urls":{}},"search_terms":["notes","inhibition","lgn","niebur"],"keywords":[],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["ErLXoH8mqSjESnrN5"]}