Pj. Shortland et al., TRIGEMINAL STRUCTURE-FUNCTION-RELATIONSHIPS - A REEVALUATION BASED ONLONG-RANGE STAINING OF A LARGE-SAMPLE OF BRAIN-STEM A-BETA FIBERS, Somatosensory & motor research, 12(3-4), 1995, pp. 249-275
Prior studies suggest that some classes of thickly myelinated (AP) aff
erents have distinct morphologies in the trigeminal (V) brainstem comp
lex, and that single fibers have collaterals with different shapes in
the four V subnuclei. However, these conclusions are based upon relati
vely few and incompletely stained fibers and limited statistical rigor
. In the present study, 104 fibers were stained more completely with n
eurobiotin in rats to provide within-fiber intersubnucleus comparisons
, and between-fiber intrasubnucleus comparisons, of collaterals associ
ated with a vibrissa, guard hairs, hairy skin, glabrous skin, or oral
structures. Collaterals from all functional categories had similar qua
litative features and were distributed somatotopically in the transver
se plane according to known maps. Fiber categories were not disproport
ionately represented at particular sites along the brainstem's rostroc
audal axis, although most fibers adhered to an onion-leaf topography i
n caudalis. Surprisingly few structure-function relationships were rev
ealed by multivariate analysis of variance and post hoc group comparis
ons, as follows: Arbors were larger in caudalis than in any other subn
ucleus; collaterals were most numerous in interpolaris; vibrissa affer
ents had more collaterals than oral and guard hair afferents; and oral
fibers had larger arbors than vibrissa or guard hair afferents in sub
nucleus oralis. Peripheral receptor association and response adaptatio
n rate failed to predict arbor shapes and terminal bouton numbers in a
ny V subnucleus. These data confirm that the locations of V primary af
ferent arbors are predicted by their receptive fields. However, collat
eral number and morphology are predicted only to a very limited extent
by the V subnucleus and peripheral receptor affiliation - a conclusio
n that contrasts with those of most prior studies of somatosensory pri
mary afferents.