Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine

, Volume 49, Issue 6, pp 539–543 | Cite as

Reflexes evoked by rhythmic stimulation of muscle nerves

  • V. D. Glebovskii


Experiments were performed on cats in decerbrate rigidity. Stimulation of the central ends of some nerves to the quadriceps femoris muscle (100 stimuli per second) evoked a steady contraction or relaxation of the other heads of this muscle. Contractions corresponding to the myotatic reflex are observed with comparatively weak stimuli. Contractions appeared and increased in amplitude in response to stimulation of afferent fibers of Group I (with stimulus intensities up to 1.8–2 times threshold intensity, and with conduction velocities of 70 m/sec and above). Proprioceptive inhibition developed with relatively strong stimuli (more than twice threshold intensity), and was connected with activity of afferent fibers of Group II (conduction velocity of 70–35 m/sec), although the possible importance of antidromic impulses in efferent fibers is not completely excluded. The idea that tendon receptors are of decisive importance in the origin of autogenetic inhibition has not been confirmed. Substantial differences are displayed in the character of reflex excitation and inhibition in individual animals.


Conduction Velocity Afferent Fiber Quadriceps Femoris Muscle Threshold Intensity Muscle Nerve 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    V. D. Glebovskii, Fiziol. Zhur. SSSR, 9, 788 (1956).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Granit, Electrophysiological Investigation of Reception [Russian translation] (Moscow, 1957).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. G. Kostyuk, Central Processes in the Simplest Reflex Arc [in Russian] (Author's Abstract of Doct. Diss.)(Kiev, 1956).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. G. Kostyuk, in: Problems of Contemporary Physiology of the Nervous and Muscular Systems [in Russian] (Tbilisi, 1950) p. 129.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. C. Alvord, M. F. G. Fuortes, J. Physiol. 122, 302 (1953).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Barker and J. Quart, Micr. sc.,89, 143 (1948).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. G. Brock, J. C. Eccles, and W. Rall, Proc. Roy. Soc., London, ser. B,138, 453 (1951).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C. M. Brooks and M. G. F. Fuortes, J. Physiol.,116, 380 (1952).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. C. Eccles, The Neurophysiological Basis of Mind (New York, 1953).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. C. Eccles, R. M. Eccles and A. J. Lundberg, J. Physiol.136, 527 (1957).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. C. Eccles, R. M. Eccles and A. J. Lundberg, J. Physiol.137, 22 (1957).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. C. Eccles and W. Rall, Proc. Roy. Soc. London. ser. B. 138, 475 (1951).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. G. F. Fuortes and D. H. Hubel, J. Physiol.133, 446. (1956).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. Granit, J. Neurophysiol., 13, 351 (1950).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. Granit and J. Ström, J. Neurophysiol.,14, 113 (1951).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. C. Hunt, J. Gen. Physiol.,38, 117 (1954).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Consultants Bureau Enterprises, Inc. 1960

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. D. Glebovskii
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Normal PhysiologyCentral Medical Institute InstituteLeningrad

Personalised recommendations