In Vitro Studies on Relationships between Muscarinic Receptors and Somatostatin in the Rat Brain
Recently, interactions among various neurotransmitters and neuromodulators have been a target of increasing attentions in neuroscientific researches. Such interactions which have been verified either pharmacologically or physiologically may be classified into several types when observed morphologically, that is such possibilities as co-existence within one neuron, conventional synaptic formation and even non-synaptic transmission between non-contiguous nerve cells have been hitherto discussed. There have been several papers which suggest that some of the neuropeptides affect the turnover rate of acetylcholine in the hippocampus, and a possible regulatory mechanism of neuropeptides on the synaptic transmission of conventional neurotransmitters is assumed (1).
KeywordsNerve Growth Factor Muscarinic Receptor High Affinity Binding Site Inositol Phospholipid Muscarinic Receptor Binding
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.D. L. Shelton and L. F. Reichardt, Studies on the expression of the ß nerve growth factor(NGF) gene in the central nervous system: level and regional distribution of NGF mRNA suggest that NGF functions as a trophic factor for several distinct populations of neurons, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 83: 2714 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.M. J. Berridge, R. M. C. Dawson, C. P. Downes, J. P. Heslop, and R. F. Irvine, Changes in the levels of inositol phosphates after agonist-dependent hydrolysis of membrane phosphoinositides, Biochem. J., 212: 473 (1983).Google Scholar
- 14.J. H. Morrison, J. B. Scherr, R. Benoit, and U DeGirolami, Neuropathology of the somatostatin system in neocortex of patients with senile dementia of the Alzheimer’s type (SDAT), Abstract, Society for Neuroscience, 14th Annual Meeting, 2: 894 (1984).Google Scholar
- 15.P. L. McGeer, E. G. McGeer, J. Suzuki, and M, Norman, Cholinergic and noradrenergic systems in aging, Alzheimer’s disease and Down’s syndrome, Abstract, Society for Neuroscience, 14th Annual Meeting, 2: 995 (1984).Google Scholar
- 17.N. J. M. Birdsall, E. C. Hulme, J. Stockton, A. S. V. Burgen, C. P. Berrie, R. Hammer, E. H. F. Wong, and M. J. Zigmond, Muscarinic receptor subclasses: evidence from binding studies. In: “CNS Receptor — From Molecular Pharmacology to Behavior”, Raven Press, New York, p. 323 (1983).Google Scholar
- 18.F. J. Ehlert, W. R. Roeske, and H. I. Yamamura, The nature of muscarinic receptor binfing. In: “Handbook of Psychopharmacology”, Plenum Press, New York, p. 241 (1983).Google Scholar
- 21.S. J. Weiss, J. S. Mckinney, and J. W. Putney, Receptor-mediated net breakdown of phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bis-phosphate in parotid acinar cells, Biochem. J., 206: 555 (1982).Google Scholar
- 22.M. Raiteri, R. Leardi, and M. Marchi, Heterogeneity of presynaptic muscarinic receptors regulating neurotransmitter release in the rat brain, J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., 228: 209 (1984).Google Scholar
- 23.L. E. Limbird, Activation and attenuation of adenylate cyclase, Biochem, J., 195: 1 (1981).Google Scholar
- 28.T. W. Vickroy, M. Watson, H. I. Yamamura, and W. R. Roeske, Differential regulation of putative M1/M2 muscarinic receptors: implications for different receptor-effector coupling mechanisms, in: “Neurotransmitter Receptors: Mechanisms of Action and Regulation”, Plenum Press, New York, p. 99 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar