Show simple item record

Retinal fibers alter tectal positional markers during the expansion of the half retinal projection in goldfish

dc.contributor.authorSchmidt, John T.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2007-04-06T18:17:07Z
dc.date.available2007-04-06T18:17:07Z
dc.date.issued1978-01-15en_US
dc.identifier.citationSchmidt, John T. (1978)."Retinal fibers alter tectal positional markers during the expansion of the half retinal projection in goldfish." The Journal of Comparative Neurology 177(2): 279-299. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/50004>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0021-9967en_US
dc.identifier.issn1096-9861en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/50004
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=621292&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractAlthough widely accepted, the theory, that neurones carry immutable cytochemical markers which specify their synaptic connections, is not consistent with plastic reorganizations. Half retinal fish were therefore tested for changed markers following expansion. Optic nerve crush at the time of the half retinal ablation resulted in regeneration of a normal, restricted projection; but nerve crush following expansion (many months later) resulted in reestablishment of the expanded projection, assessed both by electrophysiological mapping and by radioautography. Since this implied changed markers, the half retina and tectum were tested independently using the ipsilateral tectum and eye as controls. In normal fish, removal of one tectum and deflection of the corresponding optic tract toward the remaining tectum resulted in regeneration of a positionally normal but ipsilateral map. In experimental fish, after the half retina had expanded its projection to the contralateral tectum, its optic tract was deflected to the control tectum. After 40 days it had regenerated a normal, restricted map indicating that the retinal markers had not changed. Such restricted projections did not expand in the presence of the normal projection even after a year or more. Similarly, the optic tract from the normal eye was deflected to cause innervation of the tectum containing the expanded half retinal projection. After 40 days, the projection regenerated from the normal eye was similar to the expanded half retinal projection. Areas of the normal retina corresponding to the missing areas of the half retina were not represented. Tectal markers had been altered by the half retinal fibers. In a final group, tecta were denervated and tested at various intervals by innervation from ipsilateral half retinal eyes. After five months of denervation, the regenerating fibers were no longer restricted to the rostral tectum but formed an expanded projection initially. Apparently tectal markers are induced by the retinal fibers, changed during expansion, and disappear during long-term denervation.en_US
dc.format.extent1366250 bytes
dc.format.extent3118 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherThe Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biologyen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodiocals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otherLife and Medical Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherNeuroscience, Neurology and Psychiatryen_US
dc.titleRetinal fibers alter tectal positional markers during the expansion of the half retinal projection in goldfishen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNeurosciencesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumBiophysics Research Division and Division of Biological Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, U.S.A.en_US
dc.identifier.pmid621292en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/50004/1/901770207_ftp.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cne.901770207en_US
dc.identifier.sourceThe Journal of Comparative Neurologyen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.