ArticleExperimental brain research1992
Dorsal column input to thalamic VL neurons: an intracellular study in the cat.
Article in Experimental brain research, 1992. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigated the role of the ventral lateral (VL) nucleus of the thalamus as a lemniscal relay to motor cortex. Intracellular recordings were obtained from thalamic VL relay neurons in cats anesthetized with chloralose, following stimulation of the dorsal column nuclei. VL neurons were identified by their short-latency input from the cerebellar nuclei, their antidromic activation from motor cortex and their anatomical location. A total of 105 neurons was studied. The occurrence of temporal facilitation to double volleys was also examined. It was found that 80/105 (75%) neurons responded with excitation and/or inhibition to stimulation of the dorsal column nuclei. The latencies of the postsynaptic responses ranged from 2.0 to 20 ms (median 10.0 ms). The latencies of nearly all responses (79/80) were greater than 3 ms and nearly all responses (45/47) which were tested for it, displayed temporal facilitation to double shock stimulation, consistent with polysynaptic transmission. Effective stimulation sites were found in the gracile and cuneate nuclei. Recording sites were located throughout VL, including the "border region" with the ventral posterior lateral nucleus (VPL). There was no obvious topographic relationship between location of recording site and latency or polarity (excitation versus inhibition) of the synaptic responses. This is consistent with dorsal column input diffusely distributed over VL. When the recording electrodes penetrated VPL, characteristics of the EPSPs were indicative of monosynaptic transmission (short latency, no temporal facilitation). This clear transition from VL to VPL suggests that it is not necessary to define, on physiological grounds, a separate "border region" between these two nuclei.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.