Advertisement

Gustatory Behavior of Channel Catfish to Amino Acids

  • T. Valentincic
  • J. Caprio

Abstract

Electrophysiological recordings from both nerve twigs (Caprio,1978; Davenport and Caprio, 1982; Kanwal and Caprio, 1983) and single taste fibers (Kohbara et al., 1990) provided evidence that the taste system of the channel catfish is highly responsive to the amino acids, L-alanine, L-arginine and L-proline. Dose-response relations determined electrophysiologically indicate that the taste system of the channel catfish is most sensitive to L-alanine and L-arginine (Caprio, 1975), whereas L-proline becomes highly stimulatory at stimulus concentrations >10−3M (Kanwal and Caprio, 1983; Wegert and Caprio, 1991). Electrophysiological cross-adaptation (Davenport and Caprio, 1982; Kanwal and Caprio, 1983; Wegert and Caprio, 1991) and biochemical competition (Cagan, 1986) experiments indicated relatively independent receptor sites for these three amino acids. Recent patch clamp experiments (Teeter at al., 1990; Brand et al. 1991) directly confirmed the existence of independent receptor sites for the L-isomers of alanine, arginine and proline and additionally provided insight into the respective transduction mechanisms associated with these receptor sites. Current evidence indicates that the receptor sites for L-arginine and L-proline are direct ligand-operated, whereas those for L-alanine involve GTP-binding proteins and the generation of second messengers. Interestingly, the majority of amino acid taste information from the direct ligand-operated receptor sites is transmitted to the central nervous system by narrowly-tuned taste fibers that are highly responsive to L-arginine, whereas the majority of amino acid taste information involving second messenger generation is transmitted centrally by relatively broadly-tuned taste fibers that are most stimulated by L-alanine (Kohbara et al., 1990).

Keywords

Channel Catfish Stimulus Concentration Taste System Maxillary Barbel Stimulus Injection 
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. Brand, J.G., Teeter, J.H., Kumazawa, T., Huque, T. and Bayley, D.L. 1991. Transduction mechanisms for the taste of amino acids. Phvsiol. Behay. 49:899–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cagan, R.H. 1986. Biochemical studies of taste sensation. XII. Specificity of binding of taste ligands to sedimentable fraction from catfish taste tissue. Comp. Biochem. Physiol., 85A:355–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Caprio, J. 1975. High sensitivity of catfish taste receptors to amino acids. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 52A:247–251Google Scholar
  4. Caprio, J. 1978. Olfaction and taste in the channel catfish: An electrophysiological study of responses to amino acids and their derivatives. J. Comp. Physiol., 132:357–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davenport, C.J. and J. Caprio. 1982. Taste and tactile recordings from the ramus recurrens facialis innervating flank taste buds in the catfish. J. Comp. Physiol. 147:217–229Google Scholar
  6. Holland, K.N. and Teeter, J. H. 1981. Behavioral and cardiac reflex assay of the chemosensory acuity of channel catfish to amino acids. Physiol. Behay. 27: 699–707Google Scholar
  7. Johnsen, P.B. and Teeter, J.H. 1980. Spatial gradient detection of chemical cues by catfish. J. Comp. Physiol. 140:95–99Google Scholar
  8. Kanwal, J.S. and Caprio, J., 1983. An electrophysiological investigation of the oropharyngeal (IX-X) taste system in the channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus. J. Comp. Physiol. 150: 345–357Google Scholar
  9. Kohbara, J., Wegert, S., Caprio, J. 199C. L-proline information is transmitted primarily by a porticn of arginine-best taste fibers in the channel catfish. Chem. Senses 15(5):601Google Scholar
  10. Little, E.E. 1977. Conditioned aversion to amino acid flavors in the catfish Ictalurus punctatus. Physiol. Behay. 19:743–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Little, E.E. 1981. Conditioned cardiac response to the olfactory stimuli’ of amino acids in the channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus. Physiol. Behay. 27:691–697Google Scholar
  12. Moore, P.A., Gerhardt, G.A., Atema, J., 1989. High resolution spatiotemporal analysis of aquatic chemical signals using microelectrochemical electrodes. Chem. Senses 14(6):829–840Google Scholar
  13. Teeter, J.H., Brand, J.G. and Kumazawa, T. 1990 A stimulus-activated conductance in isolated taste epithelial membranes. Biophys. J. 58: 253–259Google Scholar
  14. Valentincic, T., Ota. D., Blejec, A. and Metelko, J. 1990. Chemosensory similarity of amino acids and other low molecular compounds by catfish. Chem. Senses 15 (5): 648Google Scholar
  15. Valentincic, T., Wegert, S. and Caprio, J. 1991. Behavioral responses of channel catfish to amino acids. AChemS, abs. no. 26Google Scholar
  16. Wegert, S. and Caprio, J. 1991. Receptor sites for amino acids in the facial taste system of the channe. catfish. J. Comp. Physiol. 168A:201–211Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Valentincic
    • 1
  • J. Caprio
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia
  2. 2.Department of Zoology and PhysiologyLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA

Personalised recommendations