Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

18
Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422

description

Sensor for medium-flow vs contact

Transcript of Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Page 1: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Spider mechanoreceptors

Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422

Page 2: 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

Page 3: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Sensor for medium-flow vs contact

Page 4: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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

Page 5: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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

Page 6: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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]

Page 7: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Hair length and boundary layers

Flow speed

Boundary layer

Page 8: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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)

Page 9: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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

Page 10: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Tactile hairs

Page 11: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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

Page 12: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Bending of the hair shaft

Page 13: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Scaling down the stimulus

Overload protection combined with high sensitivity to weak stimuli

Movement scale-down 750x

Page 14: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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

Page 15: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Strain detectors: Lyriform organ

Page 16: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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++

Page 17: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

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?)

Page 18: Spider mechanoreceptors Friedrich Barth (2004) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 14: 415-422.

Conclusions

• Spiders rule!• Match between physical characteristics of

stimulus environment and receptor structure is noteworthy

• Spider studies may be useful in neuromorphic engineering design