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 Christensen, J.
Right arrow Articles by Dons, R. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Christensen, J.
Right arrow Articles by Dons, R. F.
Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics, Vol. 161, Issue 1, 55-58, 1968
Copyright © 1968 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics


REGIONAL VARIATIONS IN RESPONSE OF CAT ESOPHAGEAL MUSCLE TO STIMULATION WITH DRUGS

James Christensen 1 and Robert F. Dons 1

1 Gastroenterology Research Laboratory, Department of Internal Medicine, Univercity of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa

We sought to explain differences in the regional responses of the esophagus to swallowing in terms of qualitative and quantitative differences in responses to drugs. Isometric contractions of muscle strips in vitro, in response to acetylcholine, carbachol, methacholine and norepinephrine, in concentrations from 10-8 to 10-5 g/ml, were measured to determine dose-response curves to these four drugs. Transverse strips of esophageal wall at various levels of the distal 12 cm of the cat esophagus were compared. There were no qualitative differences between responses of strips from the distal and midesophagus. The most proximal strips, from 10 to 12 cm above the phrenoesophageal ligament, exerted less tension than more distal strips at equal concentrations of all four drugs. These results fail to demonstrate a qualitative difference between sphincteric and nonsphincteric muscle. The diminished responsiveness of the most proximal level indicates that striated muscle, which predominates over smooth muscle at this level, is not stimulated under these conditions.

Submitted on November 7, 1967
Accepted on January 17, 1968







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

Copyright © 1968 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.