The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inositol Phospholipid Hydrolysis in Rat Cerebral Cortical Slices: I. Receptor Characterisation
Abstract
Abstract: Characterisation of receptor‐mediated breakdown of inositol phospholipids in rat cortical slices has been performed using a direct assay which involves prelabelling with [3 H]inositol. When slices were preincubated with [3 H]inositol, lithium was found to greatly amplify the capacity of receptor agonists such as carbachol, noradrenaline, and 5‐hydroxytryptamine to increase the amount of radioactivity appearing in the inositol phosphates. Using a large variety of agonists and antagonists it could be shown that cholinergic muscarinic, α 1,‐adrenoceptor, and histamine H 1, receptors appear to be linked to inositol phospholipid breakdown in cortex. The large responses produced by receptor agonists allowed a clear discrimination between full and partial agonists as well as quantitative analysis of competitive antagonists for each receptor. Whereas carbachol and acetylcholine (in the presence of a cholinesterase inhibitor) were full agonists, oxotremorine and arecoline were only partial agonists. Very low concentrations of atropine shifted the carbachol dose‐response curve to the right and allowed inhibition constants for the antagonist to be easily calculated. The nicotinic antagonist, mecamylamine, was ineffective. Noradrenaline and adrenaline were full agonists at α 1‐adrenoceptors, but phenylephrine and probably methoxamine were partial agonists. Prazosin, but not yohimbine, potently and competitively antagonised the noradrenaline inositol phospholipid response. Mepyramine but not cimetidine competitively antagonised the histamine response. These data provide strong confirmation for the potentiating effect of lithium on neurotransmitter inositol phospholipid breakdown and emphasise the ease with which functional responses at a number of cortical receptors can be characterised.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Berridge, M. J., Dawson, R. M. C., Downes, C. P., Heslop, J. P., & Irvine, R. F. (1983) · Biochemical Journal · doi:10.1042/bj2120473 · Cited by 1,954
Cited by
Somatostatin in the central nervous system: Physiology and pathological modifications
Epelbaum, J. (1986) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/0301-0082(86)90012-2 · Cited by 466
Nicoletti, F., Wroblewski, J., Novelli, A., Alho, H., Guidotti, A., & Costa, E. (1986) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.06-07-01905.1986 · Cited by 451
Brown, J. H., Buxton, I. L., & Brunton, L. L. (1985) · Circulation Research · doi:10.1161/01.res.57.4.532 · Cited by 295
Mouradian, R. D., Sessler, F. M., & Waterhouse, B. D. (1991) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/0006-8993(91)91162-t · Cited by 108
Metadata
- Authors
- Brown, E., Kendall, D. A., & Nahorski, S. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurochemistry
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1984-05
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1379-1387
- ISSN
- 0022-3042 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-4159
- OpenAlex
- W2154588586
- Cited by
- 517
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 21.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Inositol Phospholipid Hydrolysis in Rat Cerebral Cortical Slices: I. Receptor Characterisation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1471-4159.1984.tb02798.x
- The paper
- Brown, E., Kendall, D. A., & Nahorski, S. R. (1984). Inositol Phospholipid Hydrolysis in Rat Cerebral Cortical Slices: I. Receptor Characterisation. Journal of Neurochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-4159.1984.tb02798.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.