McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
J Neurophysiol. 2012 Sep;108(5):1403-29. doi: 10.1152/jn.00056.2012. Epub 2012 Jun 6.
The basal ganglia-recipient thalamus receives inhibitory inputs from the pallidum and excitatory inputs from cortex, but it is unclear how these inputs interact during behavior. We recorded simultaneously from thalamic neurons and their putative synaptically connected pallidal inputs in singing zebra finches. We find, first, that each pallidal spike produces an extremely brief (∼5 ms) pulse of inhibition that completely suppresses thalamic spiking. As a result, thalamic spikes are entrained to pallidal spikes with submillisecond precision. Second, we find that the number of thalamic spikes that discharge within a single pallidal interspike interval (ISI) depends linearly on the duration of that interval but does not depend on pallidal activity prior to the interval. In a detailed biophysical model, our results were not easily explained by the postinhibitory "rebound" mechanism previously observed in anesthetized birds and in brain slices, nor could most of our data be characterized as "gating" of excitatory transmission by inhibitory pallidal input. Instead, we propose a novel "entrainment" mechanism of pallidothalamic transmission that highlights the importance of an excitatory conductance that drives spiking, interacting with brief pulses of pallidal inhibition. Building on our recent finding that cortical inputs can drive syllable-locked rate modulations in thalamic neurons during singing, we report here that excitatory inputs affect thalamic spiking in two ways: by shortening the latency of a thalamic spike after a pallidal spike and by increasing thalamic firing rates within individual pallidal ISIs. We present a unifying biophysical model that can reproduce all known modes of pallidothalamic transmission--rebound, gating, and entrainment--depending on the amount of excitation the thalamic neuron receives.
基底神经节-丘脑接受苍白球的抑制性输入和皮质的兴奋性输入,但不清楚这些输入在行为过程中如何相互作用。我们在鸣禽斑马雀中同时记录丘脑神经元及其潜在的突触连接苍白球输入。我们首先发现,每个苍白球尖峰产生一个极其短暂(∼5 毫秒)的抑制脉冲,完全抑制丘脑尖峰。结果,丘脑尖峰以亚毫秒级的精度被苍白球尖峰同步。其次,我们发现,在单个苍白球尖峰间隔(ISI)内放电的丘脑尖峰数量与该间隔的持续时间呈线性相关,但与间隔前的苍白球活动无关。在一个详细的生物物理模型中,我们的结果不容易用以前在麻醉鸟类和脑片中观察到的后抑制“反弹”机制来解释,我们的数据也不能用大部分数据来描述为抑制性苍白球输入对兴奋性传递的“门控”。相反,我们提出了一种新的苍白球-丘脑传递的“同步”机制,强调了驱动尖峰的兴奋性电导的重要性,该电导与苍白球抑制的短暂脉冲相互作用。基于我们最近的发现,即皮质输入可以在鸣禽歌唱时驱动丘脑神经元的音节锁定频率调制,我们在这里报告,兴奋性输入以两种方式影响丘脑尖峰:通过缩短苍白球尖峰后丘脑尖峰的潜伏期,以及通过增加单个苍白球 ISI 内的丘脑放电率。我们提出了一个统一的生物物理模型,该模型可以根据丘脑神经元接收的兴奋量再现所有已知的苍白球-丘脑传递模式——反弹、门控和同步。