4.7 Article

Adult Plasticity in Multisensory Neurons: Short-Term Experience-Dependent Changes in the Superior Colliculus

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 29, 期 50, 页码 15910-15922

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4041-09.2009

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [EY016716, NS036916]
  2. Wallace Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multisensory neurons in the superior colliculus (SC) have the capability to integrate signals that belong to the same event, despite being conveyed by different senses. They develop this capability during early life as experience is gained with the statistics of cross-modal events. These adaptations prepare the SC to deal with the cross-modal events that are likely to be encountered throughout life. Here, we found that neurons in the adult SC can also adapt to experience with sequentially ordered cross-modal (visual-auditory or auditory-visual) cues, and that they do so over short periods of time (minutes), as if adapting to a particular stimulus configuration. This short-term plasticity was evident as a rapid increase in the magnitude and duration of responses to the first stimulus, and a shortening of the latency and increase in magnitude of the responses to the second stimulus when they are presented in sequence. The result was that the two responses appeared to merge. These changes were stable in the absence of experience with competing stimulus configurations, outlasted the exposure period, and could not be induced by equivalent experience with sequential within-modal (visual-visual or auditory-auditory) stimuli. A parsimonious interpretation is that the additional SC activity provided by the second stimulus became associated with, and increased the potency of, the afferents responding to the preceding stimulus. This interpretation is consistent with the principle of spike-timing-dependent plasticity, which may provide the basic mechanism for short term or long term plasticity and be operative in both the adult and neonatal SC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据