Vibrissal Responses of Thalamic Cells That Project to the Septal Columns of the Barrel Cortex and to the Second Somatosensory Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rodent somatosensory cortex contains barrel-related and septa-related circuits representing two separate streams of vibrissa information processing that differ in their response patterns and anatomical connections. Whereas barrel-related circuits process lemniscal inputs that transit through the thalamic barreloids, septa-related circuits process paralemniscal inputs and inputs that are relayed through the ventral lateral part of the ventral posterior medial nucleus (VPMvl). Septa-projecting thalamic afferents also target the secondary somatosensory cortical area. Although a number of studies have examined response properties in the lemniscal pathway, and demonstrated that barreloids receive feedback from specific sets of corticothalamic and reticular thalamic neurons, such information is currently lacking for the VPMvl. In the present study, we show that in sharp contrast to the relay cells of the barreloids VPMvl neurons exhibit large multiwhisker receptive fields that are independent of input from the principal trigeminal nucleus. Results also suggest that the topography of receptive fields and response properties in VPMvl rely on converging input from neurons of the interpolaris trigeminal nucleus. Tracer injection and single-cell labeling further reveal that the VPMvl receives input from specific populations of reticular thalamic and corticothalamic neurons. Together, these results confirm the status of the VPMvl as a thalamic relay of an independent parallel pathway of vibrissa information processing. They further indicate that a sensory pathway does not merely consist on a three-neuron chain that links the vibrissae to the cerebral cortex, but that it also involves specific sets of topographically related corticothalamic and reticular thalamic projections.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".