-
Introduction
Page 1
-
-
Results
Pages 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9
-
Discussion
Pages 10 - 11
-
References
Page 12
-
Added figures
Pages 13 - 14 - 15
-
Figures
Figures 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10
-
3. Cells facilitated during various control manipulations with one common element.
A number of cells were observed which seemed particularly responsive to one mode of stimulation, such as head movement or visual motion. These cells were usually responsive during affective defense and various control manipulations during which the cat also received such stimulation.
Several cells from the superior colliculus and from the region around the oculomotor nucleus fired whenever an object was moved across the visual field. These cells all fired during affective defense as well, presumably because of the perceived motion of the other attacking cat. Records from two of these cells are shown in Fig. 9.
Several cells seemed to be exclusively responsive to auditory stimuli. Two such cells from the midbrain also responded during affective defense, perhaps in response to the hissing of the two cats.
A number of cells seemed related to the activity of neck musculature and could be influenced by most manipulations which affected the cat's posture. Cells NI and N2 from the left nucleus centralis lateralis of the thalamus fired during passive head turning. Electrical stimulation at the sites of these cells also produced head turning. Cell A1 from the midbrain fired at tonic rates which increased during motor activity but stopped firing completely if the cat's chin was held up. Electrical stimulation at the site of this cell caused the cat to pull its head back. Records from these cells along with cell V4 from the hypothalamus, which fired only when the cat was standing, are shown in Fig. 9.
 |
 |
 |