Morphological characteristics of low‐threshold primary afferents in the trigeminal subnuclei interpolaris and caudalis (the medullary dorsal horn) of the golden hamster
Authors: Chiaia Nicolas L. , Hess Paul R. , Hosoi Mitsuteru , Rhoades Robert W. 
Published: January 2005

AbstractIntra‐axonal recording and horseradish peroxidase (HRP) injection techniques were employed to define the response characteristics of low‐threshold, rapidly conducting trigeminal primary afferents and the morphological features of their axon arbors in subnucleus interpolaris and subnucleus caudalis (or the medullary dorsal horn; these last two terms are used synonomously throughout the paper). A total of 61 such afferents were characterized and recovered. Of these, ten gave rapidly adapting (RA) and 17 slowly adapting (SA type I) responses to vibrissa deflection. Twenty were sensitive to guard hair deflection and 14 were responsive to indentation of the hairy skin.The vibrissa‐sensitive primary afferents were all quite similar morphologically. Primary collaterals proceeded directly, in a radial fashion, to their zone of termination and gave rise to dense and compact arbors. These tended to be larger in the medullary dorsal horn (MDH) than in interpolaris and they also gave rise to more boutons in the former nucleus. Guard hair afferents generally had smaller arbors and gave rise to fewer boutons than vibrissa‐sensitive axons. Like vibrissa afferents, their arbor were generally circumscribed in both interpolaris and MDH, but they were larger in the latter nucleus. Skin‐sensitive afferents had arbors that tended to be somewhat larger than those of vibrissa‐ or guard‐hair‐related fibers. Unlike the other fiber types, the arbors of skin‐sensitive afferents were on average larger in interpolaris than MDH. Quantitative analysis of the morphological data from well‐filled examples from each of these four functional types verified our qualitative impressions regarding differences between interpolaris and MDH collaterals of a given fiber type. Statistical comparison of data from different functional classes indicated trends that supported our qualitative impressions, but none of these was statistically significant.The topography of the trigeminal primary afferent input to interpolaris was organized such that the head was inverted and fibers with caudal receptive fields terminated in the lateral portion of the nucleus. This was true for all of the functional afferent types that we examined. Vibrissa‐related fibers differed from nonvibrissa afferents in that they tended to avoid the most rostral portion of interpolaris. In the MDH, the primary afferent representation of the head was also inverted, but fibers with caudal facial receptive fields tended to terminate medially rather than laterally. The primary afferent input to the MDH also provided some support for the “onion‐leaf” somatotopic organization that has been suggested for this nucleus (e.g., Kunc, '70). Fibers with rostral receptive fields tended to terminate in the rostral portion of the MDH while primary afferents with caudal fields gave off most of their collaterals in the caudal MDH and the rostral portion of the first cervical segment. There were, however, a number of exceptions to this generalization.