Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 205

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Somatosensory effects on neurons in dorsal cochlear nucleus

Young, E. D., Nelken, I., Conley, R. A.·1995·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

1. Single units and evoked potentials were recorded in dorsal cochlear nucleus (DCN) in response to electrical stimulation of the somatosensory dorsal column and spinal trigeminal nuclei (together called MSN for medullary somatosensory nuclei) and for tactile somatosensory stimuli. Recordings were from paralyzed decerebrate cats. 2. DCN principal cells (type IV units) were strongly inhibited by electrical stimulation (single 50-microA bipolar pulse) in MSN or by somatosensory stimulation. Units recorded in the fusiform cell and deep layers of DCN were inhibited, suggesting that the inhibition affects both types of principal cells (i.e., both fusiform and giant cells). 3. Interneurons (type II units) that inhibit principal cells were only weakly inhibited by electrical stimulation and were never excited, demonstrating that the inhibitory effect on principal cells does not pass through the type II circuit. In the vicinity of the DCN/PVCN (posteroventral cochlear nucleus) boundary, units were encountered that were excited by electrical stimulation in MSN; some of these neurons responded to sound, and some did not. Their response properties are consistent with the hypothesis that they are deep-layer inhibitory interneurons conveying somatosensory information to the DCN. 4. Analysis of the evoked potentials produced by electrical stimulation in MSN suggests that the somatosensory inputs activate the granule cell system of the DCN molecular layer. A model based on previous work by Klee and Rall was used to show that the distribution of evoked potentials in DCN can be explained as resulting from radial currents produced in the DCN molecular and fusiform-cell layers by synchronous activation of granule cells inputs to fusiform and cartwheel cells. Current-source density analysis of the evoked potentials is consistent with this model. Thus molecular layer interneurons (cartwheel and stellate cells) are a second possible source of inhibition to principal cells. 5. With lower stimulus levels (20 microA) and pulse-pair stimuli (50- to 100-ms interstimulus interval), three components of the inhibitory response can be recognized in both fusiform cell layer and deep layer type IV units: a short-latency inhibition that begins before the start of the evoked potential; a longer-latency inhibition whose timing corresponds to the evoked potential; and an excitatory component that occurs on the rising phase of the evoked potential. The excitatory component is usually overwhelmed by the inhibitory components and could be derived from granule cell inputs; the long-latency inhibitory component could be derived from cartwheel cells or the hypothesized deep-layer inhibitory interneurons.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1995.73.2.743

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 205

Metadata

Authors
Young, E. D., Nelken, I., & Conley, R. A.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
1995-02-01
Volume
73
Issue
2
Pages
743-765
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W1822181003
Cited by
205
References
0
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Somatosensory effects on neurons in dorsal cochlear nucleus. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jn.1995.73.2.743
The paper
Young, E. D., Nelken, I., & Conley, R. A. (1995). Somatosensory effects on neurons in dorsal cochlear nucleus. Journal of Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1995.73.2.743

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.