Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Articles

Afferent specific localization of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in cingulate cortex

BA Vogt
Journal of Neuroscience 1 September 1984, 4 (9) 2191-2199; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.04-09-02191.1984
BA Vogt
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The laminar distribution of acetylcholine receptors in rat cingulate cortex and their localization to axons of neurons in the anterior thalamic nuclei (ATN) were evaluated with the muscarinic antagonist [3H]propylbenzilylcholine mustard (PrBCM) in vitro. Specific binding of PrBCM in granular area 29 was heterogeneous, with a 57% variation from the highest binding in layer Ia to the lowest in layer II-III. In contrast, binding in area 24 was homogeneous, with only a 14% variation. The heterogeneity of PrBCM binding almost exactly duplicated the distribution of termination of ATN afferents in layers I to IV of area 29c. Four experiments indicated that 50% of the excess binding in layers Ia and IV was due to axonal receptor sites. First, ATN lesions abolished 41% and 27% of total specific binding in layers Ia and IV, respectively. Second, an undercut procedure that totally deafferented layers I to Va showed changes similar to those following ATN lesions, suggesting that other afferents to these layers may not have muscarinic receptors associated with them. Third, the sequence of losses in receptor binding and acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity was evaluated 2, 3, 5, 9, and 14 days following ATN lesions. Since AChE was present in ATN axons, as evidenced by early postlesion losses, the correlation of both losses as well as previous analyses of axon degeneration in this cortex confirmed that these receptors were in axons. Fourth, binding peaks in layers Ia and IV remained in area 29c following destruction of virtually all neurons with the neurotoxin ibotenic acid. This is the first evidence that the activity of a major neocortical thalamic afferent may be regulated by axonal acetylcholine receptors.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 4 (9)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 4, Issue 9
1 Sep 1984
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Afferent specific localization of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in cingulate cortex
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Afferent specific localization of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in cingulate cortex
BA Vogt
Journal of Neuroscience 1 September 1984, 4 (9) 2191-2199; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.04-09-02191.1984

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Afferent specific localization of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in cingulate cortex
BA Vogt
Journal of Neuroscience 1 September 1984, 4 (9) 2191-2199; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.04-09-02191.1984
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Choice Behavior Guided by Learned, But Not Innate, Taste Aversion Recruits the Orbitofrontal Cortex
  • Maturation of Spontaneous Firing Properties after Hearing Onset in Rat Auditory Nerve Fibers: Spontaneous Rates, Refractoriness, and Interfiber Correlations
  • Insulin Treatment Prevents Neuroinflammation and Neuronal Injury with Restored Neurobehavioral Function in Models of HIV/AIDS Neurodegeneration
Show more Articles
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2022 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.