Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pharmacological analysis of slow potentials recorded in frog olfactory bulb during natural stimulation

  • Published:
Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pharmacological agents (strychnine, picrotoxin, pentobarbital, chloralose, GABA, penicillin, morphine) were used to investigate the nature of the slow potential recorded in the frog olfactory bulb in response to natural stimulation. Three possible hypotheses were tested: 1) The slow potential is neuroglial in nature; 2) it is the analog of the dorsal-root potential of the spinal cord and reflects depolarization of primary afferents arising in the terminals of the olfactory nerve and responsible for presynaptic inhibition in the frog olfactory bulb; 3) the slow potential reflects postsynaptic processes. The results showed great similarity between changes in the slow and dorsal-root potentials of the spinal cord in response to the action of pharmacological agents. However, the slow potential is evidently a complex response and incorporates at least one other component — depolarization of the dendrites of unknown nature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature cited

  1. G. S. Voronkov and K. G. Gusel'nikova, “Inhibition in the olfactory bulb at the glomerular level,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat.,17, 744 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  2. G. S. Voronkov and K. G. Gusel'nikova, “Presynaptic inhibition in the frog olfactory bulb,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat.,18, 909 (1968).

    Google Scholar 

  3. K. G. Gusel'nikova, G. S. Voronkov, L. E. Tsitolovskii, and V. V. Éngovatov, “The nature of the main components of the orthodromie potential and inhibition of secondary neurons of the frog olfactory bulb,” Zh. Vyssh. Nerv. Deyat.,20, 649 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. I. Roitbak, “Recent data and views relating to functions of the neuroglia,” in: Integrative Activity of the Nervous System under Normal and Pathological Conditions [in Russian], Meditsina, Moscow (1968), pp. 79–96.

    Google Scholar 

  5. L. V. Kharitonovich, “Comparative morphology of the olfactory bulbs of carnivorous mammals,”Author's Abstractor Candidate's Dissertation, Minsk (1972).

  6. J. L. Barker and R. A. Nicoll, “Gamma-aminobutyric acid: role in primary afferent depolarization,” Science,176, 1043 (1972).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. I. A. Bell and E. G. Anderson, “The influence of semicarbazide induced depletion of gamma-amino-butyric acid on presynaptic inhibition,” Brain Res.,43, 161 (1972).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. R. A. Davidoff, “Penicillin and presynaptic inhibition in the amphibian spinal cord,” Brain Res.,36, 218 (1972).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. N. Davidson and C. A. P. Southwick, “Ammo-acids and presynaptic inhibition in the rat cuneate nucleus,” J. Physiol. (London),219, 689 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. C. Eccles, R. Schmidt, and W. D. Willis, “Pharmacological studies on presynaptic inhibition,” J. Physiol. (London),168, 500 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. van Herreveld and A. Niechaj, “A possibly monosynaptic component of the dorsal root potential,” Brain Res.,19, 105 (1970).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. D. Ottoson, “Studies on slow potentials in the rabbit's olfactory bulb and nasal mucosa,” Acta. Physiol. Scand.,47, 136 (1959).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. D. Ottoson, “Comparison of slow potentials evoked in the frog's nasal and olfactory bulb by natural stimulation,” Acta Physiol. Scand.,47, 149 (1959).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. P. Rudomin and J. Munor-Martinez, “A tetrodotoxin resistant primary afferent depolarization,” Exper. Neurol,25, 106 (1969).

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. F. Schmidt, “Pharmacological studies on the primary afferent depolarization of the toad spinal cord,” Pflug. Arch. Ges. Physiol.,277, 325 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. K. Tebecis and J. W. Phillis, “The use of convulsants in studying possible functions of amino acids in the toad spinal cord,” Comp. Biochem. Physiol.,28, 1303 (1969).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. S. Ueky and T. Fukuda, “Effects of central nervous stimulants on the electrical activity of the olfactory bulb in rabbits,” Fukuoka Acta. Med.,57, 909 (1966).

    Google Scholar 

  18. P. D. Wall, “Excitability changes in afferent fiber terminations and their relation to slow potentials,” J. Physiol.,14, 1 (1953).

    Google Scholar 

  19. C. Yamamoto, “Oscillation potential in strychninized olfactory bulb,” Jap. J. Physiol.,12, 14 (1962).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, USSR

    K. G. Gusel'nikova, L. V. Ivanova & G. V. Kipor

Authors
  1. K. G. Gusel'nikova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. V. Ivanova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. V. Kipor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Translated from Neirofiziologiya, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 372–379, July–August, 1975.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gusel'nikova, K.G., Ivanova, L.V. & Kipor, G.V. Pharmacological analysis of slow potentials recorded in frog olfactory bulb during natural stimulation. Neurosci Behav Physiol 7, 89–94 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01148756

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01148756

Keywords

Search

Navigation