QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

HOME  |   SEARCH  |   ARCHIVE  |   SUBSCRIBE  |   CONTACT  |   HELP

The Journal of Neuroscience, May 17, 2006, 26(20):5582-5588; doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0028-06.2006

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (4) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hollins, M. Articles by Harper, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hollins, M. Articles by Harper, D.

 Previous Article

Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive
Somatosensory Coding of Roughness: The Effect of Texture Adaptation in Direct and Indirect Touch

Mark Hollins,^1,2 Florian Lorenz,¹ and Daniel Harper¹

¹Department of Psychology and ²Curriculum in Neurobiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Mark Hollins, Department of Psychology, CB 3270, Davie Hall, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599. Email: mhollins{at}email.unc.edu

To examine somatosensory mechanisms contributing to the perception of roughness, subjects examined surfaces with rigorously specified spatial textures under conditions of direct moving contact between the fingertip and the surface (direct touch) and contact through a rigid probe (indirect touch). Subjects were trained to scan the surfaces along a consistent path and with a speed of 2.7 cm/s. With each mode of touch, periods of prolonged inspection of a single adapting surface were followed by shorter periods in which the roughness of multiple test surfaces was reported. Adaptation caused a drop in perceived roughness under conditions of indirect touch, reflecting the reduced sensitivity of vibrotactile mechanisms that are the main recipients of textural information transmitted through the probe. During direct touch, adaptation had no significant effect on the perception of textures with spatial period >200 µm, which are spatially encoded. The results have an important implication for the physiological basis of the spatial code, which is believed to involve somatosensory cortical neurons with highly structured receptive fields: these cortical populations appear to be less susceptible to adaptation than otherwise similar neuronal populations in the visual system.

Key words: roughness; somatosensory coding; texture; adaptation; direct touch; indirect touch

---

Received May 16, 2005; revised March 23, 2006; accepted April 18, 2006.

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Mark Hollins, Department of Psychology, CB 3270, Davie Hall, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599. Email: mhollins{at}email.unc.edu

Home  |   Search  |   Archive  |   Subscribe  |   Contact  |   Help