Differential c-Fos expression in the nucleus of the solitary tract and spinal cord following noxious gastric distention in the rat
Abstract
c-Fos has been used as a marker for activity in the spinal cord following noxious somatic or visceral stimulation. Although the viscera receive dual afferent innervation, distention of hollow organs (i.e. esophagus, stomach, descending colon and rectum) induces significantly more c-Fos in second order neurons in the nucleus of the solitary tract and lumbosacral spinal cord, which receive parasympathetic afferent input (vagus, pelvic nerves), than the thoracolumbar spinal cord, which receives sympathetic afferent input (splanchnic nerves). The purpose of this study was to determine the contribution of sympathetic and parasympathetic afferent input to c-Fos expression in the nucleus of the solitary tract and spinal cord, and the influence of supraspinal pathways on Fos induction in the thoracolumbar spinal cord. Noxious gastric distention to 80 mmHg (gastric distension/80) was produced by repetitive inflation of a chronically implanted gastric balloon. Gastric distension/80 induced c-Fos throughout the nucleus of the solitary tract, with the densest labeling observed within 300 microns of the rostral pole of the area postrema. This area was analysed quantitatively following several manipulations. Gastric distension/80 induced a mean of 724 c-Fos-immunoreactive nuclei per section. Following subdiaphragmatic vagotomy plus distention (vagotomy/80), the induction of c-Fos-immunoreactive nuclei was reduced to 293 per section, while spinal transection at T2 plus distention (spinal tr…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Different forces (distension, contraction, stroking) applied to the stomach wall activate both the vagal and the spinal splanchnic nerves.
“Different forces (distension, contraction, stroking) applied to the stomach wall activate both the vagal 167-169 and the spinal splanchnic 170,171 nerves,”
From Interoceptive rhythms in the brain (2023) · cites this paper as [170]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Functional and chemical anatomy of the afferent vagal system
Berthoud, H.-R., & Neuhuber, W. L. (2000) · Autonomic Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/s1566-0702(00)00215-0 · Cited by 1,280 · see citing works
Browning, K. N., & Travagli, R. A. (2014) · Comprehensive Physiology · doi:10.1002/cphy.c130055 · Cited by 541 · see citing works
Blevins, J. E., Schwartz, M. W., & Baskin, D. G. (2004) · American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00604.2003 · Cited by 332 · see citing works
Konsman, J. P., Luheshi, G. N., Bluthé, R., & Dantzer, R. (2000) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1046/j.0953-816x.2000.01319.x · Cited by 234 · see citing works
The role of vagal neurocircuits in the regulation of nausea and vomiting
Babic, T., & Browning, K. N. (2014) · European Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2013.08.047 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
Interoceptive rhythms in the brain
Engelen, T., Solcà, M., & Tallon-Baudry, C. (2023) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-023-01425-1 · Cited by 207 · see citing works
“Beyond diet and body-related aspects, given the extent of the gastric network, the gastric rhythm has been proposed to orchestrate brain dynamics between the different modules of the external senses and action, bypassing higher-level regions 181 , but this hypothesis has not been experimentally…”
Opp, M. R., & Toth, L. A. (1998) · Life Sciences · doi:10.1016/s0024-3205(98)00010-1 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Reappraising the role of the vagus nerve in GLP-1-mediated regulation of eating
Brierley, D. I., & de Lartigue, G. (2022) · British Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1111/bph.15603 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Neonatal maternal separation enhances central sensitivity to noxious colorectal distention in rat
Chung, E. K. Y., Zhang, X., Li, Z., Zhang, H., Xu, H., & Bian, Z. (2007) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2007.03.047 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
McDougle, M., Quinn, D., Diepenbroek, C., Singh, A., de la Serre, C., & de Lartigue, G. (2021) · Acta Physiologica · doi:10.1111/apha.13530 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
- Authors
- Traub, R. J., Sengupta, J. N., & Gebhart, G. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Iowa (US)
- Corresponding author
- Traub, R.J
- Venue
- Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-08
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 873-884
- ISSN
- 0306-4522 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1971993149
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 2.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (7r01ns030604-04)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS 30604, NS 19912, R01NS019912)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
- Keywords
- Fos expression, nucleus tractus solitarius, spinal cord, visceral pain, sympathetic afferents, vagotomy, spinal cord transection, area postrema, norepinephrine pressor response, visceral reflexes, intragastric balloon, visceral nociception
- MeSH terms
- Afferent Pathways, Animals, Cerebral Ventricles, Immunohistochemistry, Male, Norepinephrine, Pressure, Spinal Cord, Stomach, Vagotomy, Vagus Nerve, Gene Expression, Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-fos, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Solitary Nucleus, Rats
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
