Rabbitt R D, Highstein S M, Boyle R
Department of Bioengineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City 84112, USA.
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1996 Jun 19;781:213-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1996.tb15703.x.
Present results separate the relative contributions of semicircular canal biomechanics from hair cell/afferent biophysics in determining the amplitude and phase of afferent responses to sinusoidal motion of the head. Separation was achieved by combining electrical polarization of the endolymph with mechanical indentation of the canal limb to modulate the instantaneous firing rate of horizontal semicircular canal afferents. The electrical stimulus drives hair cell transduction currents via modulation of the Nernst-Planck potential, whereas the mechanical stimulus mimics head rotation and modulates the open probability of the transduction channels. Responses for electrical polarization therefore reflect post-transduction-current (PTC) mechanisms, and responses for mechanical stimulation include the additional influence of canal mechanics. Linear transfer functions defining individual afferent response dynamics were obtained for low levels of each stimuli and are reported in Bode form providing gain (spikes/s per micron or mV) and phase (deg re: peak stim) over the frequency range from 0.02 to 40 Hz. Combined results for electrical and mechanical stimuli distinguish the component of sensory signal processing carried out by canal mechanics from that carried out by the hair cell/afferent complexes. Individual afferents were categorized according to their response to the mechanical stimuli as low-gain velocity (LG), high-gain velocity (HG) or acceleration (A) sensitive, groups as originally defined by Boyle and Highstein to describe interafferent diversity present within the population. In contrast to the results for mechanical stimuli, all afferent groups exhibit nearly equal increases in gain and phase for increasing frequencies of electrical stimulation. Comparison of individual afferent responses for the two stimuli leads to the conclusion that the LG, HG, and A groups are distinguished primarily by diversity in the mechanical activation of associated hair cells and not by PTC mechanisms. Even though PTC processing does not contribute significantly to determining these groups, it is the primary determinant underlying high-frequency gain and phase enhancements observed in the population average. Comparison of mechanical and electrical responses also reveals the mechanical lower-corner responsible for phase enhancements and gain decreases in all afferents at low frequencies of mechanical stimulation (< 0.05 Hz). Results imply that LG afferents encode angular head velocity by canceling a phase lag and gain attenuation due to the mechanics with a phase lead and gain enhancement due to PTC mechanisms above approximately 0.2 Hz. In contrast, A group afferents encode angular head acceleration by combining high-frequency phase leads and gain enhancements present in both the mechanics and PTC mechanisms across the physiological frequency spectrum. HG afferents fall between these two extremes, and, other than the influence of the mechanical lower-corner, their response primarily reflects PTC processing.
目前的研究结果区分了半规管生物力学和毛细胞/传入神经生物物理学在决定传入神经对头部正弦运动反应的幅度和相位方面的相对贡献。通过将内淋巴的电极化与半规管臂的机械压痕相结合来调节水平半规管传入神经的瞬时放电率,从而实现了这种区分。电刺激通过调节能斯特 - 普朗克电位来驱动毛细胞转导电流,而机械刺激模拟头部旋转并调节转导通道的开放概率。因此,电极化的反应反映了转导后电流(PTC)机制,而机械刺激的反应则包括半规管力学的额外影响。针对每种刺激的低水平获得了定义单个传入神经反应动力学的线性传递函数,并以伯德形式报告,给出了在0.02至40Hz频率范围内的增益(每秒每微米或毫伏的尖峰数)和相位(度:峰值刺激)。电刺激和机械刺激的综合结果区分了由半规管力学执行的感觉信号处理成分与由毛细胞/传入神经复合体执行的成分。根据单个传入神经对机械刺激的反应,将其分类为低增益速度(LG)、高增益速度(HG)或加速度(A)敏感型,这些组最初由博伊尔和海斯坦定义,以描述群体中存在的传入神经间的多样性。与机械刺激的结果相反,对于电刺激频率增加,所有传入神经组的增益和相位增加几乎相等。两种刺激的单个传入神经反应的比较得出结论,LG、HG和A组主要通过相关毛细胞机械激活的多样性来区分,而不是通过PTC机制。尽管PTC处理对确定这些组没有显著贡献,但它是群体平均值中观察到的高频增益和相位增强的主要决定因素。机械反应和电反应的比较还揭示了在机械刺激低频(<0.05Hz)时导致所有传入神经相位增强和增益降低的机械下拐角。结果表明,LG传入神经通过消除由于力学导致的相位滞后和增益衰减,并在约0.2Hz以上通过PTC机制产生的相位超前和增益增强来编码头部角速度。相比之下,A组传入神经通过在生理频谱上结合力学和PTC机制中存在的高频相位超前和增益增强来编码头部角加速度。HG传入神经介于这两个极端之间,并且除了机械下拐角的影响外,它们的反应主要反映PTC处理。