Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.
-
Upload
eleanore-holmes -
Category
Documents
-
view
225 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.
Spider mechanoreceptors
Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422
Spider: trichobothria
Filiform setae0.1 – 1.4 mm long10 m diameter
Located on legs (90 per leg)
Driven by air flow
High sensitivity: threshold work = 2.5 – 15x10-20 J
Medium-flow sensors
Sensor for medium-flow vs contact
Design principles: Resonance in hairs
Low f
Resonant f
High f
Flow Deflection proportional to velocity
Deflection lags velocity but overshoots due to inertia
Inertia so high hair movement is reduced
Maximum sensitivity
Table I
Hairs detecting medium movement
1. Boundary layer thickness,
water air
= 2.5(/f)0.5 f = frequency of oscillation
where is the “kinematic viscosity” of the medium
air= 20 x 10-6 m2 s-1 [20ºC] [12?]
water= 1x 10-6 m2 s-1 [20ºC]
= / =“kinematic viscosity” =“dynamic viscosity”; =denisty
air = 18.3 x 10-6 Pa s [18ºC] [1 Pa = 1 N m-2]
water= 10-3 Pa s [20ºC]
A plate of 1 m2 area pushed sideways with a force of 1 N [~100 grams equiv] over a surface coated with a fluid of 1 Pa s viscosity woould move the distance of the fluid depth in 1 second
Design principles
Table I (con’d)
Hairs detecting medium movement
2. Drag per unit length, D
Dwater = 43 Dair
drag = density x area x velocity2
3. Virtual (added) mass, VM
Effective inertia, Ieff in water >> Ieff in air
[Ieff = f (fluid density, viscosity, oscillation frequency, hair diameter and length)]
IVM dominates Ieff in water mainly due to much larger dynamic viscosity .
Resonance frequency in water << resonance frequency in air because fres ~ (S/Ieff)0.5 [S = spring constant ~10-12Nm/rad]
Hair length and boundary layers
Flow speed
Boundary layer
Boundary layerHigh Frequency
Sensor arrays
Both hairs move
Boundary layerLow Frequency
Only long hairs move
(boundary layers in water are smaller, so hairs can be as well)
Behavioral correlates
• Typical prey stimuli are highly turbulent (flying insect)(>100 Hz)
• Background air velocities low frequency (10Hz)• Prey signals attenuate rapidly with distance
(to noise level at 25 cm)• Sensors tuned to 50-120 Hz: prey-specific-range
Tactile hairs
Bending of the hair shaft
• Spring constant 104 x greater than trichobothria
• Base deflection <12º owing to proximal shift of force(limits breakage)
• Sensory coding range extended
• Sensitivity greater for weak stimuli
• Structure optimized to keep maximum axial stress fixed
Bending of the hair shaft
Scaling down the stimulus
Overload protection combined with high sensitivity to weak stimuli
Movement scale-down 750x
Model for tip-link-mediated gating
Tension on the tip links enhances the probability of an open state for the stretch-gated channel anchored to the link.
Threshold = 0.3 nm
Tip-link stretch Opening stretch-gated cation-selective channels
Strain detectors: Lyriform organ
Membrane potentials
• Na+-rich, K+-poor receptor lymph is the spider norm (cf insects: K+-rich)
• In lyriform organ, receptor current is Na+
Perilymph 0 mV 4 mM K+
150 mM Na+
1 mM Ca++
Intracellular: -60 mV140 mM K+
3 mM Na+
0.2 M Ca++
+145 mV outside-positive driving potential
Endolymph (scala media): +85 mV “endocochlear potential”160 mM K+
1 mM Na+
20 M Ca++
Site of mechanosensitivity
Located at dendrite tips
Insensitive to disruption of “tubular body”
Initiation of action potentials
Initiated at dendrite tips
Na+ channel densities high in dendrites & axon
Efferent innervation
Profuse – why?GABA, glutamate and acetylcholine (peptides?)
Conclusions
• Spiders rule!• Match between physical characteristics of
stimulus environment and receptor structure is noteworthy
• Spider studies may be useful in neuromorphic engineering design