Advertisement

Dependence of the Electrical and Contractile Activities of the Gastric Smooth Muscle on Ca Ions

  • M. Papasova
  • K. Boev

Abstract

In spite of the opinion of many authors that the excitation-contraction coupling in the smooth muscle is effected in a way similar to that characteristic of the striated muscle, recent data have shown that the smooth muscle has some peculiarities of the excitation-contraction coupling. Thus the smooth muscle contraction is not always connected with the appearance and the pattern of the action potentials. In the vascular smooth muscle Somlyo and Somlyo[1] have observed contractions which are not connected with spike potentials. Such contractions we have recorded from parts of the digestive tract. Of interest in this respect are the smooth muscles making up the different regions of the stomach. Whereas from the smooth muscles of the antrum and the corpus of the stomach of cat[2,3] and man[4] spontaneous rhythmic slow potentials, type plateau (we will call them plateau action potentials, PAP) are recorded, the smooth muscle of the stomach fundus is characterized by slow changes in the membrane potential connected with tonic contractios. The objective of the present investigation is the role of Ca2+ in the realization of the excitation-contraction coupling in the smooth muscles of the antrum and fundus of the cat stomach.

Keywords

Smooth Muscle Contractile Activity Phasic Contraction Nitroprusside Sodium Tonic Contraction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. P. Somlyo and A. V. Somlyo, J.Pharmacol.Exp.Ther., 159: 129–145 (1968).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. Daniel and K. Chapman, Am.J.Dig.Dis., 8: 54–102 (1963).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Papasova, T. Nagai, and L. Prosser, Am.J.Physiol., 214: 697–702 (1968).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Papasova, I. Altaparmoakov and K. Boev, C.R.Acad.Bulg.Sci., 25: 545–548 (1972).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    K. Boev, C.R.Acad.Bulg.Sci., 24: 933–936 (1971).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Boev and K. Golenhofen, Pflügers Arch., 349: 277–283 (1974).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Papasova and K. Boev, “Physiology of Smooth Muscle,” E. Bülbring and M.F. Shuba, eds., Raven Press, New York, pp. 209–226 (1976).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    V. Kochemasova, M. Shuba, and K. Boev, C.R.Acad.Bulg.Sci., 22: 1437–1440 (1969).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Kolhardt, B. Bauer, H. Krause, and A. Fleckenstein, Pflügers Arch., 335: 309–322 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. Inomata and T. Suzuki, Experientia, 53: 215–219 (1977).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Pelhate and Y. Pichon, J.Physiol.(London), 242: 90P - 91P (1974).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Boev, K. Golenhofen, and J. Lukanov, “Physiology of Smooth Muscle,” E. Bülbring and M.F. Shuba, eds., Raven Press, New York, pp. 203–209 (1976).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    V. Buryi and K. Boev, Experientia, 36: 216–218 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. B. Bolton, Physiol.Rev., 59: 606–718 (1979).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Papasova
    • 1
  • K. Boev
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of PhysiologyBulgarian Academy of ScienceBulgaria

Personalised recommendations