Two categories of electroreceptive neurons of the posterior lateral line lobe (PLLL), termed E and I cells, were studied in the weakly electric fishApteronotus albifrons. The E cells respond with short latency, modal latency of 3.6 ms, to increases in electric organ discharge (EOD) amplitude with increased action potential frequency. The I cells responded after a longer time, modal latency of 6.8 ms, to the same stimulus with a decrease in spike frequency (Figs. 1 and 2). Mean spontaneous activity of the E cells was less than that of the I cells, 44 spikes/s compared to 59 spikes/s, and the E cells usually had a preferred phase of firing within the EOD cycle whereas the I cells did not (Fig. 2).
The mean responses of the E and I cells to various sized 1 Hz modulations of EOD amplitude were fit by power functions having exponents of 0.42 and 0.36, respectively (Fig. 10). The responses of E cells to AMs of different frequencies were similar to those of electroreceptors in that the most effective AM frequency was approximately 64 Hz. The I cells were most sensitive to lower AM frequencies, from 2 to 16 Hz, and the best AM frequency was dependent upon the stimulus intensity (Fig. 4). The absolute value of the responses, change in firing frequency, of either the E or the I cells was much lower than receptor responses to the same stimulus. However, evaluation of the differences in the sizes of the receptors' and the PLLL cells' responses along with estimates of the variances of measures of their spike frequency show that the E and I cells are approximately 16 times as sensitive as the receptors.
The E cells respond to moving metal objects with a strong increase in frequency followed by a rebound decrease and the I cells respond to plastic objects in the same manner. These responses decrease with increasing object distance lateral to the fish and the rate of this response decay is very close to that predicted on the basis of the cells responses to electronically produced AMs that have no movement component (Figs. 5 and 10).
The receptive fields of the E and I cells mapped with small spherical metal and plastic objects consist of an area of increased spike frequency followed by a decrease and these areas reflect the cells initial response to the object followed by a rebound response of opposite sign (Figs. 6 and 7). Additional regions of reduced activity boardering or preceding the main response area and differences in the amplitude of various components of the response dependent upon movement direction may be due to more complex receptive field properties.
The areas of the excitatory regions of these cells' receptive fields containing responses of at least 40% of the peak response averaged 85 mm2 for the E cells and 96 mm2 for the I cells and these areas are significantly larger than the same measures made on the receptors' fields. Approximately 6 to 15 electroreceptors are estimated to converge on a single E cell or on an I cell, via an inhibitory interneuron. This estimate is based on the differences in receptive field sizes and the density of receptors on the skin (Fig. 11) and this estimate agrees well with convergence estimates based on neuroanatomical methods.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this article Subscribe and saveSpringer+ Basic
€34.99 /Month
Price includes VAT (Germany)
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others Explore related subjectsDiscover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning. Abbreviationsamplitude modulation
coeffcient ol variation
electric organ discharge
frequency modulated
jamming avoidance response
Bastian J (1975) Receptive fields of cerebellar cells receiving extero-ceptive input in a gymnotid fish. J Neurophysiol 38:285–300
Bastian J (1976) The range of electrolocation: a comparison of electroreceptor responses and the responses of cerebellar neurons in a gymnotid fish. J Comp Physiol 108:193–210
Bastian J (1981) Electrolocation. I. How the electroreceptors ofApteronotus albifrons code for moving objects and other electrical stimuli. J Comp Physiol 144:465–479
Bastian J, Heiligenberg W (1980) Neural correlates of the jamming avoidance response ofEigenmannia. J Comp Physiol 136:135–152
Behrend K (1977) Processing information carried in a high frequency wave: properties of cerebellar units in a high frequency electric fish. J Comp Physiol 118:357–371
Bullock TH (1969) Species differences in effect of electroreceptor input on electric organ pacemakers and other aspects of behavior in electric fish. Brain Behav Evol 2:85–118
Bullock TH, Hamstra RH, Scheich H (1972) The jamming avoidance response of high frequency electric fish. J Comp Physiol 77:1–48
Enger PS, Szabo T (1965) Activity of central neurons involved in electroreception in some weakly electric fish. J Neurophysiol 28:800–818
Heiligenberg W (1973) Electrolocation of objects in the electric fish,Eigenmannia (Rhamphichthyidae, Gymnotoidei). J Comp Physiol 87:137–164
Heiligenberg W, Bastian J (1980) The control ofEigenmannia's pacemaker by distributed evaluation of electroreceptive afferences. J Comp Physiol 136:113–133
Hopkins CD (1976) Stimulus filtering and electroreception: tuberous electroreceptors in three species of gymnotid fish. J Comp Physiol 111:171–207
Langner G, Scheich H (1978) Active phase coupling in electric fish: behavioral control with microsecond precision. J Comp Physiol 128:235–240
Larimer JL, MacDonald JA (1968) Sensory feedback from electroreceptors to electromotor pacemaker centers in gymnotids. Am J Physiol 214:1253–1261
Maler L (1979) The posterior lateral line lobe of certain gymnotid fish: quantitative light microscopy. J Comp Neurol 183:323–364
Maler L, Sas EKB, Rogers J (1981) The cytology of the posterior lateral line lobe of high frequency weakly electric fish (Gymnoti- dae): Dendritic differentiation and synaptic specificity in a simple cortex. J Comp Neurol 195:87–139
Matsubara J (1980) Neural correlates of a non-jammable electrolocation system. Abstr 207.3, 10th Annual Meeting, Society for Neurosciences
Matsubara J, Heiligenberg W (1978) How well do electric fish electrolocate under jamming? J Comp Physiol 125:285–290
McCreery DB (1977) Spatial organization of receptive fields of lateral lemniscus neurons of the lateral line lobe of the catfishIctalurus nebulosus. J Comp Physiol 113:341–353
Scheich H (1977) Neural basis of communication in the high frequency electric fish,Eigenmannia virescens (jamming avoidance response). J Comp Physiol 113:181–255
Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1969) Biometry. The principles and practices of statistics in biological research. Freeman, San Francisco, pp 246–249
Szabo T (1965) Sense organs of the lateral line system in some electric fish of the Gymnotidae, Mormyridae and Gymnarchidae. J Morphol 117:229–250
Watanabe A, Takeda K (1963) The change of discharge frequency by A.C. stimulus in a weakly electric fish. J Exp Biol 40:56–66
Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, 73019, Norman, Oklahoma, USA
Joseph Bastian
I am grateful to Drs. J. Matsubara, W. Heiligenberg, C. Hopkins, L. Maler, T.H. Bullock, and C. Bell for many useful suggestions concerning this work. I also thank P. Barton and J. Sims for help with the manuscript. Supported by NIH Grant RUINS-12337.
About this article Cite this articleBastian, J. Electrolocation. J. Comp. Physiol. 144, 481–494 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01326833
Accepted: 15 July 1981
Issue Date: December 1981
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01326833
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4