Functional and Biochemical Evidence for Muscarinic Receptor Subtypes in the Gastrointestinal Tract

  • A. Giachetti
  • E. Monferini
  • A. Schiavone
  • R. Micheletti
  • R. Hammer
  • H. Ladinsky

Abstract

Although the notion of muscarinic receptor heterogeneity originated from studies on agonist binding (Birdsall et al. 1978), the most compelling evidence for the classification of muscarinic receptors into subtypes was obtained from studies of selective antagonists, of which pirenzepine is the prototype (Hammer et al. 1980). Originally, biochemical characterization of muscarinic receptors was performed in discrete brain areas and later extented to peripheral tissues abundantly endowed with these receptors. Conversely, the majority of pharmacological investigations centered on the interaction of agonists and antagonists with peripheral muscarinic receptors, particularly those involved in gastrointestinal secretion and motility.

Keywords

Sucrose Filtration Fractionation Histamine Choline 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Atweh S, Simon JR, Kuhar MJ (1975) Utilization of sodium-dependent high affinity choline uptake in vitro as a measure of the activity of cholinergic neurones in vivo. Life Sci 17: 1535–1544.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birdsall NJM, Burgen ASV, Hulme EC (1978) The binding of agonists to brain muscarinic receptors. Mol Pharmacol 14: 723–736.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Briggs CA, Cooper JR (1981) A synaptosomal preparation from the guinea pig ileum myenteric plexus. J Neurochem 36: 1097–1108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fox JET, Daniel EE, MacDonald TJ, Jury J, Robotham KH (1983) Evidence for a muscarinic inhibitory brake activated by peptides in the canine small intestine. In: Roman C (ed) Gastrointestinal motility. MTP Press, Lancaster, pp 327–333.Google Scholar
  5. Halim S, Kilbinger H, Wessler I (1982) Pirenzepine does not discriminate between pre-and post-synaptic muscarine receptors in the guinea-pig small intestine. Scand J Gastroenterol 17 [Suppl 72]: 87–93.Google Scholar
  6. Hammer R, Berrie CP, Birdsall NJM, Burgen ASV, Hulme EC (1980) Pirenzepine distinguishes between different subclasses of muscarinic receptors. Nature (Lond) 283: 90–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hammer R, Giachetti A (1982) Muscarinic receptor subtypes: M1 and M2 biochemical and functional characterization. Life Sci 31: 2991–2998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heinzel G (1982) In: Bozler G, van Rossum SM (eds) Pharmacokinetics during drug development: data analysis and evaluation techniques. Fischer, New York, ppGoogle Scholar
  9. Mc Caman RE, Hunt JM (1965) Microdetermination of choline acetylase in nervous tissue. J Neurochem 12: 253–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. North A, Slack BE, Surprenant A (1985) Muscarinic M1 and M2 receptors mediate depolarization and presynaptic inhibition in guinea pig enteric nervous system. J Physiol (Lond) in press.Google Scholar
  11. Pagani F, Schiavone A, Monferini E, Hammer R, Giachetti A (1984) Distinct muscarinic receptor subtypes (M1 and M2) controlling acid secretion in rodents. Trends Pharmacol Sci 5 (Suppl, Subtypes of Muscarinic Receptors) pp 66–68.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Giachetti
  • E. Monferini
  • A. Schiavone
  • R. Micheletti
  • R. Hammer
  • H. Ladinsky

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations