Update on Limbic Connections in Human Brain: A Possible Closer Relationship Between Brain Processes and Visceral Information
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/ROJ-2-e004Abstract
The limbic system includes cortical and subcortical brain structures involved in several
functions, first of all emotional and memory processes and integration. Two key structures
of the limbic network are hippocampus and amygdala; their connections with the other brain
regions are allowed through a number of white matter pathways, including cingulum, uncinate
fasciculus and fornix.1 All these pathways were studied by means of invasive approaches in animals
as well as by means of MRI techniques, e.g. diffusion based tractography. These methods
resulted very useful for the non-invasive study, in vivo, of these limbic brain connections,1 as
well as to show new possible pathways, e.g. the cerebellar limbic one.2 Recently, new insights
regarding possible limbic functions came from a study conducted by means of advanced tractographic
algorithms.3 The main goal of the latter paper was to investigate subtentorial limbic
connections in healthy humans; this was an interesting point, since these connections were previously
investigated only in animals by means of viral tracing techniques.4 These previous studies
revealed extensive connections of both amygdala and hippocampus with brainstem nuclei,
as well as connections with the periphery of the body through spinal projections.5,6 By means
of constrained spherical deconvolution (CSD)7 based tractography, Arrigo and colleagues3 reported
and described hippocampal and amygdalar connections with midbrain, pons and bulb
as well as connections with cervical spinal cord (Figure 1). These represented novel findings in
humans, suggesting that functional speculation based on animals studies might be adopted also
in human brain. Amygdalar connections with brainstem were proposed to be related with faster
answers to fear stimuli, in order to establish a more efficient alerting mechanism.8-10 Based on
findings provided by animal studies, other authors proposed a role of amygdalar-brainstem
pathways in the visceral control as well as in the control of the appetite.11,12 With respect to
hippocampal-brainstem pathways, these were previously reported in animals13,14; those results
allowed to advance the hypothesis of a larger learning and memory connectivity network, involving
also brainstem structures, which might influence the limbic system during memory
and learning elaboration.15 In this context we might advance the hypothesis that information
References
Catani M, Dell’acqua F, Thiebaut de Schotten M. A revised limbic system model for memory, emotion and behaviour. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2013; 37(8): 1724-1737. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.07.001
Arrigo A, Mormina E, Anastasi GP, et al. Constrained spherical deconvolution analysis of the limbic network in human, with emphasis on a direct cerebello-limbic pathway. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014; 8: 987. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00987
Arrigo A, Mormina EM, Calamuneri A, et al. Amygdalar and hippocampal connections with brainstem and spinal cord: A diffu-sion MRI study inhuman brain. Neuroscience. 2016. pii: S0306-4522(16)30706-0. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.12.016
Castle M, Comoli E, Loewy AD. Autonomic brainstem nuclei are linked to the hippocampus. Neuroscience. 2005; 134(2): 657- 669. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.04.031
Giesler GJ Jr, Katter JT, Dado RJ. Direct spinal pathways to the limbic system for nociceptive information. Trends Neurosci. 1994; 17(6): 244-250. doi: 10.1016/0166-2236(94)90007-8
Newman HM, Stevens RT, Apkarian AV. Direct spinal projections to limbic and striatal areas: Anterograde transport studies from the upper cervical spinal cord and the cervical enlargement in squirrel monkey and rat. J Comp Neurol. 1996; 365(4): 640-658. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9861(19960219)365:4<640::AID-CNE10>3.0.CO;2-L
Tournier JD, Calamante F, Connelly A. Robust determination of the fibre orientation distribution in diffusion MRI: Non-negativity constrained super-resolved spherical deconvolution. Neuroimage. 2007; 35(4): 1459-1472. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.016
Usunoff KG, Itzev DE, Rolfs A, Schmitt O, Wree A. Brain stem afferent connections of the amygdala in the rat with special ref-erences to a projection from the parabigeminal nucleus: A fluorescent retrograde tracing study. Anat Embryol (Berl). 2006; 211(5): 475-496. doi: 10.1007/s00429-006-0099-8
Deboer T, Ross RJ, Morrison AR, Sanford LD. Electrical stimulation of the amygdala increases the amplitude of elicited ponto-geniculo-occipital waves. Physiol Behav. 1999; 66(1): 119-124.
Liddell BJ, Brown KJ, Kemp AH, et al. A direct brainstem–amygdala–cortical ‘alarm’ system for subliminal signals of fear. Neuroimage. 2005; 24(1): 235-243. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.08.016
García-Medina NE, Miranda MI. Nucleus of the solitary tract chemical stimulation induces extracellular norepinephrine release in the lateral and basolateral amygdala. Brain Stimul. 2013; 6(2): 198-201. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2012.03.020
Carter ME, Soden ME, Zweifel LS, Palmiter RD. Genetic identification of a neural circuit that suppresses appetite. Nature. 2013; 503(7474): 111-114. doi: 10.1038/nature12596
Gasbarri A, Packard MG, Campana E, Pacitti C. Anterograde and retrograde tracing of projections from the ventral tegmental area to the hippocampal formation in the rat. Brain Res Bull. 1994; 33(4): 445-452. doi: 10.1016/0361-9230(94)90288-7
Gasbarri A, Sulli A, Packard MG. The dopaminergic mesencephalic projections to the hippocampal formation in the rat. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 1997; 21(1): 1-22. doi: 10.1016/S0278-5846(96)00157-1
Kirk IJ, McNaughton N. Mapping the differential effects of procaine on frequency and amplitude of reticularly elicited hippo-campal rhythmical slow activity. Hippocampus. 1993; 3(4): 517-525. doi: 10.1002/hipo.450030411
Mayer EA. Gut feelings: the emerging biology of gut-brain communication. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2011; 12(8): 453-466. doi: 10.1038/nrn3071
Krogias C, Hoffmann K, Eyding J, et al. Evaluation of basal ganglia, brainstem raphe and ventricles in bipolar disorder by tran-scranial sonography. Psychiatry Res. 2011; 194(2): 190-197. doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2011.04.002
Sköld M, Källstrand J, Nehlstedt S, et al. Thalamocortical abnormalities in auditory brainstem response patterns distinguish DSM-IV bipolar disorder type I from schizophrenia. J Affect Disord. 2014; 169: 105-111. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2014.08.002
Yamamoto T, Tsuji S. Anti-Ma2-associated encephalitis and paraneoplastic limbic encephalitis [In Japanese]. Brain Nerve. 2010; 62(8): 838-851. doi: 10.11477/mf.1416100733
Waragai M, Chiba A, Uchibori A, Fukushima T, Anno M, Tanaka K. Anti-Ma2 associated paraneoplastic neurological syndrome presenting as encephalitis and progressive muscular atrophy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006; 77(1): 111-113. doi: 10.1136/ jnnp.2005.068775
Carabotti M, Scirocco A, Maselli MA, Severi C. The gut-brain axis: Interactions between enteric microbiota, central and en-teric nervous systems. Ann Gastroenterol. 2015; 28(2): 203-209. Web site. http://annalsgastro.gr/index.php/annalsgastro/article/ view/1959/1537. Accessed December 23, 2016
Qi R, Liu C, Weng Y, et al. Disturbed interhemispheric functional connectivity rather than structural connectivity in irritable bowel syndrome. Front Mol Neurosci. 2016; 9: 141. doi: 10.3389/fnmol.2016.00141
Weng Y, Qi R, Liu C, et al. Disrupted functional connectivity density in irritable bowel syndrome patients. Brain Imaging Behav. 2016. doi: 10.1007/s11682-016-9653-z
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Radiology (ROJ) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.