Biomedical subjects

J C Eccles

Publications and source records attributed to J C Eccles.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

PubMed1975

Medial recticular neurons projecting Rostrally.

1. In the latter part of investigations on the medial reticular neurons, stimulation was applied to the ipsilateral tegmental tract in the upper pontine level. Of the 426 neurons in this series, 56 had rostrally projecting axons as evidenced by their antidromic responses. 2. Of these 56 neurons, 41 were activated by limb nerve stimulation, usually very strongly, and so qualify as units in the reticular activating system. Fastigial stimulation monosynaptically excited 14 of these reticular activating neurons, so providing and ascending pathway from the cerebellar vermis. 3. Axonal branching has been demonstrated by antidromic testing in four reticular neurons with ascending axons. In two there were branches to the fastigial nucleus and in two, down the spinal cord. 4. The latency histograms of the excitatory and inhibitory responses resembled those for reticular neurons with descending axons except for the poverty of inhibitory responses in neurons not receiving a fastigial projection.

Animals↗

PubMed1975

Responses of red nucleus neurons to antidromic and synaptic activation.

An account is given of the responses of 432 red nucleus (RN) neurons with axons projecting down the spinal cord. Almost half were in an initial series of 18 experiments on anesthetized cats, and the remainder were in a second series of 12 experiments on decerebrate unanesthetized cats. The differences between the two series were of little significance. All recording was from single neurons using extracellular glass microelectrodes that were inserted throught the right superior colliculus and directed to the right red nucleus at a standard orientation. Identification of RN neurons was both by location, checked by subsequent histology, and by antidromic invasion from the spinal cord. The spinal stimulating electrodes were placed in proximity to the left rubrospinal tract at C2 and L2 segmental levels. Axonal conduction velocities were calculated from the latency differential between the L2 and C2 antidromic responses and were usually in the range 60-130 m/s, 97% of all neurons located in the red nucleus had axons projecting to the C2 level, and 37% projected to the L2 level. The responses of 229 RN neurons were observed with stimulation applied to the contralateral (left) interpositus nucleus. In 10 (5%) there were antidromic responses to both interpositus and C2 stimulation, a finding in good agreement with the anatomical description of rare axon collaterals from rubrospinal fibers to the interpositus nucleus. In 209 (91%), there was a clear monosynaptic excitation. The impulse generation was at a latency usually of 1.0-1.8 ms, which a modal value of 1.4 ms. The afferent inputs to RN neurons were provided by stimulation either of predominantly cutaneous nerves in all four limbs or of cutaneous mechanoreceptors of the contralateral forelimb and hindlimb...

Anesthesia, General↗

PubMed1975

Somatotopic studies on red nucleus: spinal projection level and respective receptive fields.

The somatotopic inputs into red nucleus (RN) neurons have been studied with special reference to their level of projection in the spinal cord. As inputs we employed either volleys in predominantly cutaneous nerves of forelimb and hindlimb or cutaneous mechanoreceptor discharges evoked by taps to footpads of forelimb and hindlimb. There has been physiological confirmation of the anatomical findings that RD neurons projecting to the lumbar cord are located in the ventrolateral zone of the pars magnocellularis, whereas in the dorsomedial zone are RN neurons with cervical but not lumbar projection. Somatotopically there was found to be a differentiation of input to RN neurons according as they projected to the lumbar or only to the cervical cord. This finding was presented in the form both of tables and of somatotopic maps. As expected, this discrimination was more restrictive for the more selective inputs from pad taps than for nerve inputs. Nevertheless, forelimb inputs often had a considerable excitatory and inhibitory action on lumbar-projecting RN neurons, and vice versa for cervical-projecting neurons. There were two notable somatotopic findings that suggest specificities of connectivities. First, despite the large convergence of IP neurons onto RN neurons (about 50-fold), the degree of somatotopic discrimination was about the same for interpositus and RN neurons with two testing procedures: between inputs from forelimb and hindlimb; and between inputs from pads on one foot. Second, although there was in the interpositus nucleus a considerable topographical admixture of neurons with dominant forelimb or hindlimb inputs, the axonal projections of these neurons were apparently unscrambled on the way to the target RN neurons, so as to deliver the somatotopic specificities observed for two classes of RN neurons; those projecting down the spinal cord beyond L2 level, and those projecting to C2 but not L2. Finally, there is a general discussion of motor control with reference to the pathway; pars intermedia of anterior lobe of cerebellum leads to interpositus nucleus leads to red nucleus leads to rubrospinal tract leads to spinal motoneurons.

Animals↗

PubMed1974