Research reportTactile directional sensibility: peripheral neural mechanisms in man
Introduction
The ability to tell the direction of an object’s motion across the skin is an easily observed sensory function that appears to be fairly selectively vulnerable to damages of the somatosensory pathway, all the way from the peripheral receptors to the cerebral cortex [2], [7], [14], [18], [24], [27]. Consequently, assessment of tactile directional sensibility has been recommended as a standard method for evaluation of patients with somatosensory disturbances [2], [14]. A detailed knowledge of the underlying neural mechanisms is a prerequisite for correct interpretation of the results, as well as for providing guidelines for the optimal testing procedure.
In theoretical studies, considerable interest has been focused on the brain’s capacity to infer the direction of motion on the basis of spatio-temporal information; i.e. information about the temporal order of activation of adjacent cutaneous mechanoreceptors [4], [6], [8], [9], [10]. However, besides spatio-temporal information the brain may also utilize another type of sensory data for directional sensibility. Gould et al. [11] reported that directional sensibility was better for a stimulus that caused friction between the moving object and the skin compared to an air-stream stimulus. In our laboratory we confirmed the findings of Gould et al. and showed that for the stimulus that caused friction, but not for the air-stream stimulus, the accuracy of directional sensibility was positively correlated to the indentation force [19], [22]. Based on this and other evidence it was concluded that directional sensibility might depend on the parallel processing of two different types of sensory information. One consists of spatial data that vary with time and the other consists of direction-specific responses, induced by friction, from afferents sensitive to changes in skin stretch [22].
Many of the above psychophysical experiments were made in the forearm skin of humans. Five types of mechanoreceptors with myelinated afferents, i.e. SA1 (slowly adapting type 1, Merkel), SA2 (slowly adapting type 2, Ruffini), hair units, field units, and PC (Pacini) units have been identified in that skin region, and their receptive field structures have been described in detail [26].
The aim of the present investigation was to study how the different types of myelinated mechanoreceptors in the forearm skin may contribute to directional sensibility. The skin was stimulated by the same probe movements as in one of the psychophysical experiments [22], and recordings were simultaneously made from single units. It will be shown that SA1 and field units have the capacity to signal spatio-temporal information, whereas a population of SA2 units may provide direction-specific information about changes in lateral skin stretch.
A preliminary report of part of this work has previously been published in abstract form [21].
Section snippets
Material and methods
Mechanoreceptive units with rapidly conducting afferents and receptive fields in the forearm skin were studied in 18 experiments on healthy volunteers; seven females and ten males, 22–31 years old. Informed consent was obtained, the study was performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Ethical Committee of the Medical Faculty, Göteborg University, approved the procedure.
Results
Thirty-one fast-conducting afferents with mechanoreceptors located in the forearm skin were studied. The receptive fields were evenly distributed between the wrist and cubital fold on the radial and posterior surfaces of the forearm. The units were separated into four types on the basis of the criteria described in Methods, i.e. (i) slowly adapting type 1 (SA1, Merkel, n=8), (ii) slowly adapting type 2 (SA2, Ruffini, n=12), (iii) hair units, rapidly adapting (n=7), and (iv) field units, rapidly
Discussion
Previous psychophysical experiments have shown that tactile directional sensibility is dependent on the parallel processing of spatial information expressed as a function of time and information about friction-induced changes in skin stretch [11], [19], [22]. We have now found that SA1 and field units may signal spatio-temporal information, whereas a population of SA2 units may signal friction-induced changes in skin stretch.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Swedish Medical Research Council (Grant 14X-3548), the Swedish Society of Medicine, and the Magn Bergvall foundation. Drs. Åke Vallbo and Ulf Norrsell kindly read and advised on a previous version of the text. We would like to thank Sven-Öjvind Swahn for valuable technical support.
References (27)
- et al.
Agraphesthesia. A disorder of directional cutaneous kinesthesia or a disorientation in cutaneous space
J. Neurol. Sci.
(1982) Comprehensive clinical evaluation of perioral sensory function
Oral Max. Surg. Clin. North Am.
(1992)- et al.
Factors influencing cutaneous directional sensitivity: a correlative psychophysical and neurophysiological investigation
Brain Res. Rev.
(1985) - et al.
A framework for the analysis of mixed time series/point process data — Theory and application to the study of physiological tremor, single motor unit discharges and electromyograms
Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol.
(1995) Skin mechanoreceptors in the human hand: receptive field characteristics
- et al.
Random Data
(1986) - et al.
The structure and function of the slowly adapting type II mechanoreceptor in hairy skin
Q. J. Exp. Physiol.
(1972) - et al.
Factors influencing cutaneous directional sensitivity
Sens. Processes.
(1978) Quantitative analysis of static strain sensitivity in human mechanoreceptors from hairy skin
J. Neurophysiol.
(1992)- et al.
Receptor encoding of moving tactile stimuli in humans. I. Temporal pattern of discharge of individual low-threshold mechanoreceptors
J. Neurosci.
(1995)
Receptor encoding of moving tactile stimuli in humans. II. The mean response of individual low-threshold mechanoreceptors to motion across the receptive field
J. Neurosci.
Discrimination of the direction of motion on the human hand: A psychophysical study of stimulation parameters
J. Neurophysiol.
Cited by (77)
Quantitative sensory testing of temperature, pain, and touch in adults with Down syndrome
2015, Research in Developmental DisabilitiesCitation Excerpt :Stimuli were administered to the volar aspect of the forearm. This site is often used in somatosensory studies (Olausson, Wessberg, & Kakuda, 2000; Scherder, Rommelse, Bröring, Faraone, & Sergeant, 2008) because of the high density of intra-epidermal nerve fibers (Kawakami, Ishihara, & Miharam, 2001). No time limit was used.
Hyperactivation to pleasant interoceptive stimuli characterizes the transition to stimulant addiction
2015, Drug and Alcohol DependenceMultimodal interactions between proprioceptive and cutaneous signals in primary somatosensory cortex
2015, NeuronCitation Excerpt :In the periphery, cutaneous inputs are processed by skin mechanoreceptors (Hsiao and Gomez-Ramirez, 2012; Johnson, 2001; Johnson et al., 2000), which convey their signals to SI where neural representations of various tactile features emerge (Bensmaia et al., 2008; Pei et al., 2010, 2011; Saal and Bensmaia, 2014; Weber et al., 2013; Yau et al., 2013). In contrast, proprioceptive inputs are processed by joint, muscle, and certain skin mechanoreceptors (e.g., Ruffini corpuscle) (Cordo et al., 2002; Edin and Abbs, 1991; Houk and Henneman, 1967; Matthews and Simmonds, 1974; Olausson et al., 2000; Proske and Gregory, 2002; Roll et al., 1989). However, unlike cutaneous sensory processing, the cortical mechanisms underlying proprioception, particularly of the hand and fingers, are poorly understood.
A multi-digit tactile motion stimulator
2014, Journal of Neuroscience MethodsDepth recognition thresholds of tactile perception for fine stripe texture of bar shapes
2024, Qinghua Daxue Xuebao/Journal of Tsinghua University