Purves D, Thompson W
J Physiol. 1979 Dec;297(0):95-110. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1979.sp013029.
Stimulation of preganglionic axons arising from different levels of the thoracic spinal cord causes different effects on end-organs supplied by the superior cervical ganglion (Langley, 1892; Nja & Purves, 1977a; Lichtman, Purves & Yip, 1979). For example, stimulation of the first thoracic ventral root (T1) causes pupillary dilatation and widening of the palpebral fissure; stimulation of T4, on the other hand, has little effect on the eye, even though axons arising from this level innervate about as many superior cervical ganglion cells as those from T1. Thus ganglion cell innervation is selective. (1) Three months after crushing the major post-ganglionic branches of the superior cervical ganglion this differential effectiveness is lost: T1 and T4 stimulation have approximately equal effects on the end-organs of the eye. (2) In normal animals, the cellular counterpart of selective end-organ effects is the innervation of each ganglion cell by a contiguous subset of the spinal segments that innervate the ganglion as a whole. One of these segments is usually dominant, the strength of innervation from adjacent segments falling off as a function of distance from the dominant one (Nja & Purves, 1977a). Intracellular recordings from ganglion cells 3 months after post-ganglionic axotomy showed that this selective pattern is re-established. (3) Since the innervation of ganglion cells appears normal, the abnormal end-organ responses after post-ganglionic axotomy suggest that ganglion cell axons are not limited to their original targets during peripheral re-innervation. This suggestion is supported by the finding that ganglion cells sending axons to different peripheral destinations via the second and third cervical spinal nerves were no longer distinguishable on the basis of their segmented inputs 3 months after post-ganglionic axotomy. (4) Similar results were obtained when the preganglionic cervical trunk was cut at the same time as the post-ganglionic axons were crushed; the pattern of end-organ responses was abnormal, whereas individual ganglion cells were re-innervated according to the rules of contiguity and segmental dominance. (5) These results indicate that ganglion cells do not undergo a compensatory change in the segmental innervation they receive when their axons regenerate to targets different from, or in addition to those they originally innervated, even when an entirely new set of ganglionic connexions is formed. This suggests that ganglion cells, or some aspect of their immediate environment, possess a permanent label that determines the segmental innervation they receive.
刺激发自胸段脊髓不同节段的节前轴突,会对上颈神经节所支配的终末器官产生不同影响(兰利,1892年;尼亚和珀维斯,1977a;利希特曼、珀维斯和叶,1979年)。例如,刺激第一胸段腹根(T1)会导致瞳孔扩张和睑裂增宽;而刺激T4对眼睛影响很小,尽管发自该节段的轴突支配的上颈神经节细胞数量与来自T1的轴突支配的数量大致相同。因此,神经节细胞的支配具有选择性。(1)在上颈神经节的主要节后分支被切断三个月后,这种差异效应消失:T1和T4刺激对眼部终末器官产生的影响大致相同。(2)在正常动物中,选择性终末器官效应在细胞层面的对应表现是,支配整个神经节的脊髓节段的相邻亚群对每个神经节细胞进行支配。其中一个节段通常占主导,来自相邻节段的支配强度会随着与主导节段距离的增加而减弱(尼亚和珀维斯,1977a)。节后轴突切断三个月后对神经节细胞进行的细胞内记录显示,这种选择性模式得以重新建立。(3)由于神经节细胞的支配看起来正常,节后轴突切断后终末器官出现的异常反应表明,神经节细胞轴突在周围神经再支配过程中并不局限于其原来的靶标。节后轴突切断三个月后,通过第二和第三颈段脊神经向不同外周目的地发送轴突的神经节细胞,根据其节段性输入已无法区分,这一发现支持了上述观点。(4)在切断节后轴突的同时切断节前颈干,也得到了类似结果;终末器官反应模式异常,而单个神经节细胞则根据邻接性和节段性优势规则进行再支配。(5)这些结果表明,当神经节细胞的轴突再生至与其原来支配的靶标不同或除原来靶标外的其他靶标时,即使形成了全新的一组神经节连接,神经节细胞所接受的节段性支配也不会发生代偿性变化。这表明神经节细胞或其紧邻环境的某些方面具有一种永久性标记,该标记决定了它们所接受的节段性支配。