JN Watch the video to learn how APS reaches out to developing nations.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 75: 518-521, 1996;
0022-3077/96 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
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 Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Villarroel, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Villarroel, A.

Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 75, Issue 1 518-521, Copyright © 1996 by APS


ARTICLES

Progression of M-current inhibition after agonist removal

A. Villarroel
Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, State University of New York at Stony Brook 11794, USA.

1. With the use of a fast-flow system, brief applications (40 ms) of acetylcholine on whole cell voltage-clamped dissociated bullfrog sympathetic neurons caused an inward current due to the opening of channels associated with nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. In cells clamped at -39 mV, a slower inward current developed after a latency of approximately 200 ms, owing to M-current inhibition. 2. The second phase of the response was mediated by the activation of muscarinic receptors and evoked by muscarine. 3. The time elapsed from the termination of maximal agonist application (10 microM muscarine) to the initiation of recovery was 4.5 s. This value was independent of the duration of the stimulus between 0.5 and 10 s. In contrast, applications > 4 s were necessary to reach 95% of the maximal inhibition during agonist application. 4. These results have three important implications. 1) The M-current modulation time course does not reflect either the time course of muscarinic receptor activation, or the time course of second-messenger production. 2) The latency of M-current inhibition is not due to the distance between muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (AChR) and nicotinic AChR. 3) Saturating concentrations of the second messenger are produced in < 500 ms in response to maximal concentrations of agonist.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online