JPET

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 RIKER, W. K.
Right arrow Articles by KOSAY, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by RIKER, W. K.
Right arrow Articles by KOSAY, S.
Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics, Vol. 173, Issue 2, 284-292, 1970
Copyright © 1970 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics


DRUG INDUCTION AND SUPPRESSION OF STIMULUS-BOUND REPETITION IN SYMPATHETIC GANGLIA

WILLIAM K. RIKER 1 and SEZEN KOSAY 1

1 Department of Pharmacology, Woman's Medical College of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Bullfrog sympathetic ganglion cells, in the presence of echothiophate, neostigmine or physostigmine, exhibit a brief burst of stimulus-bound repetitive spikes (SBR) in response to an orthodromic stimulus (1/10 sec). The response to antidromic stimulation was never repetitive. The occurrence of SBR was related to drug concentration and at maximum effect, approximately 80 to 90% of cells display repetition. Increasing drug concentration beyond this point gradually suppresses SBR, and the completion of this effect merges with the beginning of transmission block. The maximal SBR caused by physostigmine may also be suppressed when d-tubocurarine or lidocaine are added to the physostigminp—Ringer's solution, in concentrations which do not block transmission. Lidocaine and d-tubocurarine begin to block transmission only after they have completely suppressed SBR. The results present distinct incompatibilities with cholinergic theory and suggest that prejunctional, direct drug actions cause induction and suppression of SBR and transmission block. By means of the complete concentration-effect data it is possible to speculate about the specific reactive groups in each drug which are responsible for the separate, although sequential, effects.

Submitted on December 1, 1969
Accepted on February 17, 1970







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

Copyright © 1970 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.