Doyle M W, Andresen M C
Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, Oregon 97201-3098, USA.
J Neurophysiol. 2001 May;85(5):2213-23. doi: 10.1152/jn.2001.85.5.2213.
The timing of events within the nervous system is a critical feature of signal processing and integration. In neurotransmission, the synaptic latency, the time between stimulus delivery and appearance of the synaptic event, is generally thought to be directly related to the complexity of that pathway. In horizontal brain stem slices, we examined synaptic latency and its shock-to-shock variability (synaptic jitter) in medial nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS) neurons in response to solitary tract (ST) electrical activation. Using a visualized patch recording approach, we activated ST 1-3 mm from the recorded neuron with short trains (50-200 Hz) and measured synaptic currents under voltage clamp. Latencies ranged from 1.5 to 8.6 ms, and jitter values (SD of intraneuronal latency) ranged from 26 to 764 micros (n = 49). Surprisingly, frequency of synaptic failure was not correlated with either latency or jitter (P > 0.147; n = 49). Despite conventional expectations, no clear divisions in latency were found from the earliest arriving excitatory postsynaptic currents (EPSCs) to late pharmacologically polysynaptic responses. Shortest latency EPSCs (<3 ms) were mediated by non-N-methyl-D-aspartate (non-NMDA) glutamate receptors. Longer latency responses were a mix of excitatory and inhibitory currents including non-NMDA EPSCs and GABAa receptor-mediated currents (IPSC). All synaptic responses exhibited prominent frequency-dependent depression. In a subset of neurons, we labeled sensory boutons by the anterograde fluorescent tracer, DiA, from aortic nerve baroreceptors and then recorded from anatomically identified second-order neurons. In identified second-order NTS neurons, ST activation evoked EPSCs with short to moderate latency (1.9-4.8 ms) but uniformly minimal jitter (31 to 61 micros) that were mediated by non-NMDA receptors but had failure rates as high as 39%. These monosynaptic EPSCs in identified second-order neurons were significantly different in latency and jitter than GABAergic IPSCs (latency, 2.95 +/- 0.71 vs. 5.56 +/- 0.74 ms, mean +/- SE, P = 0.027; jitter, 42.3 +/- 6.5 vs. 416.3 +/- 94.4 micros, P = 0.013, n = 4, 6, respectively), but failure rates were similar (27.8 +/- 9.0 vs. 9.7 +/- 4.4%, P = 0.08, respectively). Such results suggest that jitter and not absolute latency or failure rate is the most reliable discriminator of mono- versus polysynaptic pathways. The results suggest that brain stem sensory pathways may differ in their principles of integration compared with cortical models and that this importantly impacts synaptic performance. The unique performance properties of the sensory-NTS pathway may reflect stronger axosomatic synaptic processing in brain stem compared with dendritically weighted models typical in cortical structures and thus may reflect very different strategies of spatio-temporal integration in this NTS region and for autonomic regulation.
神经系统内事件发生的时间是信号处理与整合的一个关键特征。在神经传递过程中,突触潜伏期,即刺激传递与突触事件出现之间的时间,通常被认为与该通路的复杂性直接相关。在水平脑干切片中,我们检测了孤束核(NTS)神经元对孤束(ST)电激活的突触潜伏期及其逐次刺激的变异性(突触抖动)。采用可视化膜片钳记录方法,我们用短串刺激(50 - 200 Hz)在距记录神经元1 - 3 mm处激活ST,并在电压钳制下测量突触电流。潜伏期范围为1.5至8.6 ms,抖动值(神经元内潜伏期的标准差)范围为26至764微秒(n = 49)。令人惊讶的是,突触失败频率与潜伏期或抖动均无相关性(P > 0.147;n = 49)。尽管有传统预期,但从最早到达的兴奋性突触后电流(EPSC)到后期药理学上的多突触反应,在潜伏期方面并未发现明显区分。最短潜伏期的EPSC(<3 ms)由非N - 甲基 - D - 天冬氨酸(非NMDA)谷氨酸受体介导。较长潜伏期的反应是兴奋性和抑制性电流的混合,包括非NMDA EPSC和GABAa受体介导的电流(IPSC)。所有突触反应均表现出显著的频率依赖性抑制。在一部分神经元中,我们用来自主动脉神经压力感受器的顺行荧光示踪剂DiA标记感觉终扣,然后从解剖学上确定的二级神经元进行记录。在确定的二级NTS神经元中,ST激活诱发潜伏期短至中等(1.9 - 4.8 ms)但抖动一致极小(31至61微秒)的EPSC,这些EPSC由非NMDA受体介导,但失败率高达39%。这些确定的二级神经元中的单突触EPSC在潜伏期和抖动方面与GABA能IPSC有显著差异(潜伏期,2.95 ± 0.71对5.56 ± 0.74 ms,平均值 ± 标准误,P = 0.027;抖动,42.3 ± 6.5对416.3 ± 94.4微秒,P = 0.013,分别为n = 4和6),但失败率相似(27.8 ± 9.0对9.7 ± 4.4%,P = 0.08,分别)。这些结果表明,抖动而非绝对潜伏期或失败率是单突触与多突触通路最可靠的判别指标。结果表明,与皮质模型相比,脑干感觉通路在整合原则上可能不同,这对突触性能有重要影响。感觉 - NTS通路独特的性能特性可能反映出与皮质结构中典型的树突加权模型相比,脑干中更强的轴 - 体突触处理,因此可能反映出该NTS区域以及自主神经调节中非常不同的时空整合策略。