Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T14:34:18.323Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Control of movements of the stomach and spiral intestine of Raja and Scyliorhinus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2009

J. Z. Young
J. Z. Young
Affiliation:
Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, 183 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BP,* and The Laboratory, Marine Biological Association, Citadel Hill, Plymouth, PL1 2PB
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The extrinsic nerves of the stomach of dogfish and skates regulate the frequency and amplitude of contraction by inhibition followed by rebounds. By contrast the nerves of the spiral intestine are excitatory.

Stimulation of the vagus nerve of the ray produced slight reduction in the amplitude of spontaneous contractions of the cardiac stomach. Much greater inhibition was produced by stimulation of the sympathetic nerves and was followed by large rebound contractions. These effects were imitated by adrenalin and serotonin which altered the frequency and amplitude of contraction in various ways. These actions were not blocked by either propranalol (1–5 × 10−5 M) or phentolamine (2 × 10−5 M) and indeed were often increased. The excitatory response to adrenalin was not blocked by TTX even after this had blocked the response to the nerve. Responses both to the nerve and adrenaline were blocked by trazodone. Acetyl choline caused some contraction of the stomach but only at high concentration.

Muscles of the spiral intestine of Raja or Scyliorhinus were activated by stimulation of their sympathetic nerves and by adrenalin. These responses were not blocked by phentolamine and only reduced by propranalol They were blocked by trazodone. The response to adrenalin continued after the nerve was blocked by TTX. Acetyl choline had very little effect on the spiral intestine.

The striking differences between the responses of the stomach and intestine are probably related to the fact that the plexus in the latter contains no nerve cells. The neurons in the stomach are therefore presumbly connected with the inhibition and large rebound contractions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 63 , Issue 3 , August 1983 , pp. 557 - 574
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Al Yassiri, M. M., Ankier, S. I. & Bridges, P. K., 1981. Trazodone, a new antidepressant. Life of Science, 28, 2449–2458.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andrews, P. L. R. & Grundy, D., 1981. The effect of stimulus characteristics on the rebound contraction in the gastric corpus. Journal of Physiology, 313, 24–25P.Google Scholar
Babkin, B. P., Friedman, M. H. F. & Mackay-Sawyer, M. E., 1935. Vagal and sympathetic innervation of the stomach in the skate. Journal of the Biological Board of Canada, 1, 239–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bottazzi, F., 1902. Untersuchungen über das viscerale Nervensystem der Selachier. Zeitschrift für Biologie, 43, 372.Google Scholar
Brodin, E., Alumets, J., Håkanson, R., Leander, S., Sundler, F., 1981. Immunoreactive substance P in the chicken gut: distribution, development and possible functional significance. Cell and Tissue Research, 216, 455–469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burnstock, G., 1975. Purinergic transmission. In Handbook of Psycho-pharmacology (ed. Iversen, et al. ), pp. 131–194. Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, G., 1975. Inhibitory vagal innervation of the stomach in fish. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 50 C, 169–170.Google ScholarPubMed
Campbell, G. & Burnstock, G., 1968. Comparative physiology of gastrointestinal motility. In Handbook of Physiology, section 6, Alimentary Canal, vol. IV, Motility (ed. Code, C. F.), pp. 2213–2266. Washington, D.C.: American Physiological Society.Google Scholar
Euler, U. S. Von & Ostlund, E., 1957. Effects of certain biologically occurring substances on the isolated intestine offish. Acta physiologica scandinavica, 38, 364–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gershon, M. D., 1981. The enteric nervous system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 4, 227–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leander, S., Hakanson, R., Rosell, S., Folkers, K., Sundler, F., Tornqvist, K., 1981. A specific substance P antagonist blocks smooth muscle contractions induced by non-cholinergic, non-adrenergic nerve stimulation. Nature, London, 294, 467–469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, A. & Hiatt, R. B., 1967. Action of epinephrine on gastrointestinal motility in the spiny dogfish. Bulletin. Mount Desert Island Biological Laboratory, 7, 32–33.Google Scholar
Müller, E. & Liljestrand, G., 1918. Anatomische u. experimentelle Untersuchungen über das autonomische Nervensystem der Elasmobranchien nebst Bemerkungen ü die Darmnerven bei den Amphibien u. Saugetieren. Archiv für Anatomie und Physiologie (Abteilung Anatomie), 1918, 137–172.Google Scholar
Nicholls, J. V. V., 1933. The effect of temperature variations and of certain drugs upon the gastric motility of elasmobranch fishes. Contributions to Canadian Biology and Fisheries, 7, 449–463.Google Scholar
Nicholls, J. V. V., 1934. Reaction of the smooth muscle of the gastro-intestinal tract of the skate to stimulation of autonomie nerves in isolated nerve muscle preparations. Journal of Physiology, 83, 56–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norberg, K. A. & Sjöqvist, F., 1966. New possibilities for adrenergic modulation of ganglionic transmission. Pharmacological Reviews, 18, 743–751.Google ScholarPubMed
Young, J. Z., 1933. The autonomie nervous system of selachians. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science, 75, 571–624.Google Scholar
Young, J. Z., 1980. Nervous control of stomach movements in dogfishes and rays. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 60, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar