Prey-catching behavior (PCB) of the frog consists of a sequence of movements as a stimulus-response chain of the behavioral pattern in which each action presents a signal for the subsequent event. The transformation of visual information into appropriate spatiotemporal patterns of motor activity is carried out by the motor pattern generators located in the brainstem reticular formation. The motor pattern generators provide input to the motoneurons either directly or via the last-order premotor interneurons (LOPI). Although the feeding program is predetermined in this way, various sensory mechanisms control the motor activity. By using neuronal labeling methods, we have studied the morphological details of sensorimotor integration related to the hypoglossal motoneurons to provide further insight into the neuronal circuits underlying the PCB in ranid frogs. Our major findings are as follows. (1) Dendrodendritic and dendrosomatic contacts established by the crossing dendrites of hypoglossal (XII) motoneurons may serve as a morphological option for co-activation, synchronization and proper timing of the bilateral activity of tongue muscles. The crossing dendrites may also provide a feedforward amplification of various signals to the XII motoneurons. The overlapping dendritic territories of the motoneurons innervating protractor and retractor muscles may facilitate the coordinated activities of the agonistic and antagonistic muscles. (2) The musculotopic organization of the XII motoneurons is reflected in the distribution of LOPI for the protractor and retractor muscles of the tongue. (3) Direct sensory inputs from the trigeminal, vestibular, glossopharyngeal-vagal, hypoglossal and spinal afferent fibers to the XII motoneurons may modulate the basic motor pattern and contribute to the plasticity of neuronal circuits. (4) The electrical couplings observed in the vestibulocerebellar neuronal circuits may synchronize and amplify the afferent signals. The combination of chemical and electrical impulse transmission provides a mechanism by which motoneurons can be activated sequentially.

Keywords:
Brainstem, Hypoglossal nerve, Prey-catching behavior, Sensorimotor integration
1.
Anderson CW (2001): Anatomical evidence for brainstem circuits mediating feeding motor programs in the leopard frog, Rana pipiens. Exp Brain Res 140:12-19.
2.
Anderson CW, Nishikawa KC (1993): A prey-type dependent hypoglossal feedback system in the frog Rana pipiens. Brain Behav Evol 42:189-196.
3.
Antal M, Tornai I, Székely G (1980): Longitudinal extent of dorsal root fibres in the spinal cord and brain stem of the frog. Neuroscience 5:1311-1322.
4.
Bácskai T, Matesz C (2002): Primary afferent fibers establish dye-coupled connections in the frog central nervous system. Brain Res Bull 57:317-319.
5.
Bácskai T, Veress G, Halasi G, Deak A, Racz E, Szekely G, Matesz C (2008): Dendrodendritic and dendrosomatic contacts between oculomotor and trochlear motoneurons of the frog, Rana esculenta. Brain Res Bull 75:419-423.
6.
Bácskai T, Veress G, Halasi G, Matesz C (2010): Crossing dendrites of the hypoglossal motoneurons: possible morphological substrate of coordinated and synchronized tongue movements of the frog, Rana esculenta. Brain Res 1313:89-96.
7.
Birinyi A, Straka H, Matesz C, Dieringer N (2001): Location of dye-coupled second order and of efferent vestibular neurons labeled from individual semicircular canal or otolith organs in the frog. Brain Res 921:44-59.
8.
Birinyi A, Szekely G, Csapó K, Matesz C (2004): Quantitative morphological analysis of the motoneurons innervating muscles involved in tongue movements of the frog Rana esculenta. J Comp Neurol 470:409-421.
9.
Campbell RE, Gaidamaka G, Han SK, Herbison AE (2009): Dendro-dendritic bundling and shared synapses between gonadotropin-releasing hormone neurons. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:10835-10840.
10.
Corbacho F, Nishikawa KC, Weerasuriya A, Liaw JS, Arbib MA (2005): Schema-based learning of adaptable and flexible prey-catching in anurans. I. The basic architecture. Biol Cybern 93:391-409.
11.
Dieringer N (1995): ‘Vestibular compensation': neural plasticity and its relations to functional recovery after labyrinthine lesions in frogs and other vertebrates. Prog Neurobiol 46:97-129.
12.
Elmund J, Bowman JP, Morgan RJ (1983): Vestibular influence on tongue activity. Exp Neurol 81:126-140.
13.
Erulkar SD, Soller RW (1980): Interactions among lumbar motoneurons on opposite sides of the frog spinal cord: morphological and electrophysiological studies. J Comp Neurol 192:473-488.
14.
Ewert JP, Schürg-Pfeiffer E, Weerasuriya A (1984): Neurophysiological data regarding motor pattern generation in the medulla oblongata of toads. Naturwissenschaften 71:590-591.
15.
Fanardjian VV, Sarkisian VS (1988): Synaptic mechanisms of interaction between Deiters' nucleus and the nuclei of some cranial nerves. Neuroscience 24:135-142.
16.
Grinnell AD (1966): A study of the interaction between motoneurones in the frog spinal cord. J Physiol 182:612-648.
17.
Harwood DV, Anderson CW (2000): Evidence for the anatomical origins of hypoglossal afferents in the tongue of the leopard frog, Rana pipiens. Brain Res 862:288-291.
18.
Liaw JS, Weerasuriya A, Arbib MA (1994): Snapping: a paradigm for modeling coordination of motor synergies. Neural Netw 7:1137-1152.
19.
Liaw JS, Weerasuriya A, Arbib MA (1998): Feedback Modulation in Coordinating Rapid Motor Synergies. Center for Neural Engineering Technical Report. Los Angeles, University of Southern California.
20.
Mameli O, Tolu E (1987): Hypoglossal responses to macular stimulation in the rabbit. Physiol Behav 39:273-275.
21.
Mameli O, Tolu E, Melis F, Caria MA (1988): Labyrinthine projection to the hypoglossal nucleus. Brain Res Bull 20:83-88.
22.
Mandal R, Anderson CW (2009) Anatomical organization of brainstem circuits mediating feeding motor programs in the marine toad, Bufo marinus. Brain Res 1298:99-110.
23.
Mandal R, Anderson CW (2010) Identification of muscle spindles in the submentalis muscle of the marine toad, Bufo marinus and its potential proprioceptive capacity in jaw-tongue coordination. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 293:1568-1573.
24.
Matesz C, Bácskai T, Nagy E, Halasi G, Kulik A (2002): Efferent connections of the vestibular nuclei in the rat: a neuromorphological study using PHA-L. Brain Res Bull 57:313-315.
25.
Matesz C, Schmidt I, Szabo L, Birinyi A, Székely G (1999): Organization of the motor centres for the innervation of different muscles of the tongue: a neuromorphological study in the frog. Eur J Morphol 37:190-194.
26.
Matesz C, Székely G (1977): The dorsomedial nuclear group of cranial nerves in the frog. Acta Biol Acad Sci Hung 28:461-474.
27.
Matesz C, Székely G (1978): The motor column and sensory projections of the branchial cranial nerves in the frog. J Comp Neurol 178:157-176.
28.
Monroy JA, Nishikawa K (2011): Prey capture in frogs: alternative strategies, biomechanical trade-offs, and hierarchical decision making. J Exp Zool A Ecol Genet Physiol 315A:61-71.
29.
Nishikawa KC (2000): Feeding in frogs; in Schwenk K (ed): Feeding: Form, Function and Evolution in Tetrapod Vertebrates. San Diego, Academic Press, pp 117-144.
30.
Nishikawa KC, Anderson CW, Deban SM, O'Reilly JC (1992): The evolution of neural circuits controlling feeding behavior in frogs. Brain Behav Evol 40:125-140.
31.
Nishikawa KC, Gans C (1992): The role of hypoglossal sensory feedback during feeding in the marine toad, Bufo marinus. J Exp Zool 264:245-252.
32.
Puskár Z, Antal M (1997): Localization of last-order premotor interneurons in the lumbar spinal cord of rats. J Comp Neurol 389:377-389.
33.
Rácz E, Bácskai T, Szabo G, Székely G, Matesz C (2008): Organization of last-order premotor interneurons related to the protraction of tongue in the frog, Rana esculenta. Brain Res 1187:111-115.
34.
Rossiter CD, Yates BJ (1996): Vestibular influences on hypoglossal nerve activity in the cat. Neurosci Lett 211:25-28.
35.
Sauerland EK, Mitchell SP (1970): Electromyographic activity of the human genioglossus muscle in response to respiration and to positional changes of the head. Bull Los Angeles Neurol Soc 35:69-73.
36.
Schwippert W, Beneke T, Framing E (1989): Visual integration in bulbal structures of toads: intra/extra-cellular recording and labeling studies; in Ewert J-P, Arbib MA (eds): Visuomotor Coordination, Amphians, Comparisons, Models, and Robots. New York, Plenum, pp 481-536.
37.
Sokoloff AJ (1991): Musculotopic organization of the hypoglossal nucleus in the grass frog, Rana pipiens. J Comp Neurol 308:505-512.
38.
Stensaas LJ, Stensaas SS (1971): Light and electron microscopy of motoneurons and neuropile in the amphibian spinal cord. Brain Res 31:67-84.
39.
Stuesse SL, Cruce WL, Powell KS (1983): Afferent and efferent components of the hypoglossal nerve in the grass frog, Rana pipiens. J Comp Neurol 217:432-439.
40.
Székely G, Matesz C (1993): The efferent system of cranial nerve nuclei: a comparative neuromorphological study. Adv Anat Embryol Cell Biol 128:1-92.
41.
Weerasuriya A (1983): Snapping in toads: some aspects of sensorimotor interfacing and motor pattern generation; in Ewert J-P, Capranica RR, Ingle DJ (eds): Advances in Vertebrate Neuroethology. New York, Plenum, pp 613-627.
42.
Weerasuriya A (1989): In search of the pattern generator for snapping in toads; in Ewert J-P, Arbib MA (eds): Visuomotor Coordination, Amphibians, Comparisons, Models, and Robots. New York, Plenum, pp 589-614.
43.
Wolf E, Birinyi A, Pomahazi S (1995): A fast 3-dimensional neuronal tree reconstruction system that uses cubic polynomials to estimate dendritic curvature. J Neurosci Methods 63:137-145.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.