JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Neurophysiol 53: 390-410, 1985;
0022-3077/85 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sakuranaga, M.
Right arrow Articles by Naka, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sakuranaga, M.
Right arrow Articles by Naka, K.

Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 53, Issue 2 390-410, Copyright © 1985 by APS

ARTICLES

Signal transmission in the catfish retina. II. Transmission to type-N cell

M. Sakuranaga and K. Naka

Responses from channel catfish type-N (sustained amacrine) cells were evoked either by step changes in illuminance, i.e. brightening or dimming from a mean illuminance, or by a white-noise modulated light stimulus. Current injected into the horizontal-cell soma or axon produced responses in type-N cells that were very similar to those produced by light stimuli. Light- and current-evoked responses had linear and second- and third-order nonlinear components; the former contributed 40-50%, whereas the latter contributed 20-30% to the total response. The remainder of the response could have been due to higher-order nonlinearities or to intrinsic as well as extrinsic noise. Nonlinear components in the light- and current-evoked responses were sharp transient peaks, which were prominent in white-noise-evoked responses, and oscillatory wavelets. The high-frequency components in the cell's response, which result from nonlinearity, were absent in the responses from bipolar and horizontal cells. The nonlinear responses were predicted by the second- and third-order kernels. The type-N cell response was complex because the response had both linear and nonlinear components, and because of the complexities of second- and, probably, third-order kernels. The cell's complex response reflects the complex nature of the cell's function as well as its synaptic organization.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Neurophysiol.Home page
D. A. Burkhardt and P. K. Fahey
Contrast Rectification and Distributed Encoding By ON-OFF Amacrine Cells in the Retina
J Neurophysiol, October 1, 1999; 82(4): 1676 - 1688.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Neurophysiol.Home page
P. L. Newland and Y. Kondoh
Dynamics of Neurons Controlling Movements of a Locust Hind Leg III. Extensor Tibiae Motor Neurons
J Neurophysiol, June 1, 1997; 77(6): 3297 - 3310.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Neurophysiol.Home page
P. L. Newland and Y. Kondoh
Dynamics of Neurons Controlling Movements of a Locust Hind Leg II. Flexor Tibiae Motor Neurons
J Neurophysiol, April 1, 1997; 77(4): 1731 - 1746.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online