Multiple cortical systems influence a single vibrissa muscle

A Aman Maharjan (In Silico Brain Sciences Group, Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology of Behavior–caesar) J Jason M. Guest (In Silico Brain Sciences Group, Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology of Behavior–caesar) J Jean-Alban Rathelot (Institut de Neurosciences de la Timone CNRS, Aix-Marseille Université) F Fiorella M. Gomez Osorio (In Silico Brain Sciences Group, Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology of Behavior–caesar) P Peter L. Strick (Neurobiology Department, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine) M Marcel Oberlaender (In Silico Brain Sciences Group, Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology of Behavior–caesar)

Abstract

What is the neural substrate that enables the cerebral cortex to control a single mystacial vibrissa and orchestrate its movement? To answer this question, we injected rabies virus into the intrinsic muscle that protracts the rat C3 vibrissa and used retrograde transneuronal transport to identify the cortical neurons that influence the muscle. A surprisingly diverse set of cortical areas is the origin of disynaptic control over the motoneurons that influence the C3 protractor. More than two thirds of these layer 5 pyramidal neurons (L5PNs) are dispersed in frontal and parietal areas outside the primary motor cortex (vM1). This observation emphasizes the importance of descending motor commands from non-primary motor areas. More than a third of the L5PNs originate from somatosensory areas, such as the barrel field (vS1). The barrel field has been long considered a prototypic model system for studying sensory processing at the level of the cerebral cortex. Even so, we find that the number of L5PNs in vS1, and even their peak density, rivals the number and peak density of L5PNs in vM1. Thus, our results emphasize the importance of the barrel field in processing motor output. The distribution of L5PNs in vM1 and vS1 leads us to propose a model of vibrissa protraction in which vM1 output results in protraction, and vS1 output results in reciprocal inhibition (suppression) of protraction. This paired initiation and suppression of complementary movements may be a general feature of the descending output from the rodent M1 and S1.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 122, Issue 23
Published June 10, 2025
ISSN 0027-8424
Publisher National Academy of Sciences

Authors (6)

A

Aman Maharjan

In Silico Brain Sciences Group, Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology of Behavior–caesar

J

Jason M. Guest

In Silico Brain Sciences Group, Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology of Behavior–caesar

J

Jean-Alban Rathelot

Institut de Neurosciences de la Timone CNRS, Aix-Marseille Université

F

Fiorella M. Gomez Osorio

In Silico Brain Sciences Group, Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology of Behavior–caesar

P

Peter L. Strick

Neurobiology Department, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

M

Marcel Oberlaender

In Silico Brain Sciences Group, Max Planck Institute for Neurobiology of Behavior–caesar