JPET Celsis microsomes equal better data

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tsai, T. H.
Right arrow Articles by Fleming, W. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tsai, T. H.
Right arrow Articles by Fleming, W. W.
Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics, Vol. 148, Issue 1, 40-47, 1965
Copyright © 1965 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics


ANTAGONISM OF MONOAMINE OXIDASE INHIBITORS AGAINST NOREPINEPHRINE, ACETYLCHOLINE AND POTASSIUM IN THE ISOLATED NICTITATING MEMBRANE OF THE CAT

T. H. Tsai 1 and W. W. Fleming 1

1 Department of Pharmacology, West Virginia University Medical Center, Morgantown, West Virginia

The antagonism of iproniazid, harmaline, pargyline, tranylcypromine and pheniprazine against the actions of norepinephrine, acetylcholine and potassium has been studied in the isolated medial smooth muscle of the nictitating membrane of the cat. The tension-response characteristics of the preparation were determined and it was established that repeated dose-response curves in a single preparation were very consistent. All five MAO inhibitors caused a marked antagonism of norepinephrine which was characterized by depression of the maximum respones. The antagonism against acetylcholine was very similar. Potassium was also antagonized, although maximum responses could not be determined. There was no evidence for specific blockade of norepinephrine in preference to the other two agonists. It is concluded that the antagonism is noncompetitive.

Accepted on November 24, 1964







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
All ASPET Journals Molecular Pharmacology Pharmacological Reviews
 Molecular Interventions Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Copyright © 1965 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.