JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Neurophysiol 60: 536-548, 1988;
0022-3077/88 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jiang, L. H.
Right arrow Articles by Oomura, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jiang, L. H.
Right arrow Articles by Oomura, Y.

Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 60, Issue 2 536-548, Copyright © 1988 by APS

ARTICLES

Effect of catecholamine-receptor antagonists on feeding-related neuronal activity in the central amygdaloid nucleus of the monkey: a microiontophoretic study

L. H. Jiang and Y. Oomura
Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Kyushu University 60, Fukuoka, Japan.

1. Neuronal activity in the central amygdaloid nucleus (ACE) was recorded during a visually guided bar-press feeding task, and the modulatory effects of catecholaminergic blockers were investigated. 2. The feeding task had the following four phases: 1) a cue light to signal the start of bar press, 2) bar press, 3) a short cue tone followed by food delivery, and 4) ingestion reward. Of 278 cells observed, 176 (63%) increased or decreased their discharge rates in one or more phases of the feeding task. Of these, 60 (34%) responded to the cue light, 81 (46%) to the bar press, 66 (37%) to the cue tone, and 176 (100%) during the reward period. In the ingestion reward phase, firing of 128 (73%) increased and firing of 48 (27%) decreased. The reward-related response depended on the nature of food. In the trials with aversion food, some neurons increased firing (n = 6), whereas others showed opposite firing changes (n = 10). 3. The decreased firing rate during the reward period was greatly attenuated in the no-reward tasks (n = 29) and was blocked by electrophoretic application of a beta-adrenoceptive antagonist [sotalol (SOT), n = 26]. Noradrenaline (NA) application mimicked the inhibitory effect on the reward-related activity during extinction trial (n = 4). These results suggest that the decreased firing rate observed during the reward period was modulated by beta-adrenoreceptors. 4. Of 32 neurons tested, the activity of 8 (25%) and 14 (44%) were enhanced by the cue light or bar press, respectively. These effects were attenuated by electrophoretic application of a dopamine (DA) antagonist [spiperone (SPP)] but not by SOT. This indicates that dopaminergic inputs may be related to recognition of visual signals and to motor initiation during the monkey feeding paradigm.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 DiabetesHome page
B. E. Levin, L. Kang, N. M. Sanders, and A. A. Dunn-Meynell
Role of Neuronal Glucosensing in the Regulation of Energy Homeostasis
Diabetes, December 1, 2006; 55(Supplement_2): S122 - S130.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online