The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The relative sensitivity to vibration of muscle receptors of the cat
Open accessAbstract
1. Longitudinal vibration was applied to the de‐efferented soleus muscle of anaesthetized cats while recording the discharge of single afferent fibres from the proprioceptors within the muscle. Conditions were defined under which vibration can be used to excite selectively the primary endings of muscle spindles without exciting the secondary endings of muscle spindles or Golgi tendon organs. 2. Frequencies of vibration of 100‐500 c/s were used. The maximum amplitude of vibration which the vibrator could produce fell with increasing frequency; it was 250 μ (peak to peak) for 100 c/s and 20 μ for 500 c/s. 3. Primary endings of muscle spindles were very sensitive to vibration. Most could be ‘driven’ to discharge one impulse for each cycle of vibration over the whole of the above range of frequencies, provided the initial tension was moderate (20‐200 g wt.). The amplitude of vibration required to produce driving usually varied by less than a factor of two over the whole range of frequencies. The most sensitive endings could be driven by vibrations of below 10 μ amplitude. 4. Stimulation of single fusimotor fibres, whether static or dynamic fusimotor fibres, increased the sensitivity of primary endings to vibration. Contraction of the main muscle, produced by stimulating α motor fibres, reduced the sensitivity of primary endings even when fusimotor fibres were also being stimulated. 5. The secondary endings were very insensitive to longitudinal vibration and with the amplitudes available not one of twenty‐five endings could be driven at 150 c/s or above; one ending could be driven at 100 c/s by vibration of 250 μ amplitude. Stimulation of single fusimotor fibres, probably all of which were static fusimotor fibres, made them slightly more sensitive to vibration but none of them approached the sensitivity of the primary endings. 6. The Golgi tendon organs were as insensitive as the secondary endings when the muscle was not contracting and none could be driven at any frequency in spite of quite high tensions in the muscle. However, when the muscle was made to contract by stimulating α fibres in ventral root filaments the tendon organs became appreciably more sensitive, the degree of sensitization increasing approximately with the strength of the contraction. They never became as sensitive as the primary endings, and with the amplitudes of vibration available none was driven at frequencies of over 250 c/s. 7. When the amplitude of vibration was somewhat below that required to produce driving of an ending it still produced some increase in its mean frequency of discharge. However, amplitudes of vibration of 25‐50 μ applied to a non‐contracting muscle, whether with or without fusimotor stimulation, produced driving of nearly all primary endings without any significant increase in the mean frequency of firing of secondary endings or Golgi tendon organs. Such vibration can therefore be used as a specific stimulus for the primary endings in order to investigate the central effects or repetitive discharge of the Ia afferent fibres from them. 8. Experiments on endings in the peroneus longus muscle showed that these behaved similarly to those in soleus.
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
Cited by
Proske, U., & Gandevia, S. C. (2012) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00048.2011 · Cited by 2,223
Projection from low‐threshold muscle afferents of hand and forearm to area 3a of baboon's cortex
Phillips, C. G., Powell, T. P. S., & Wiesendanger, M. (1971) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1971.sp009579 · Cited by 373
Neural Control of Muscle Length and Tension
Houk, J. C., & Rymer, W. Z. (1981) · Comprehensive Physiology · doi:10.1002/cphy.cp010208 · Cited by 272
Detection of Vibration Transmitted Through an Object Grasped in the Hand
Brisben, A. J., Hsiao, S. S., & Johnson, K. O. (1999) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1999.81.4.1548 · Cited by 259
Descending Monosynaptic and Reflex Control of γ‐Motoneurones
Grillner, S., Hongo, T., & Lund, S. (1969) · Acta Physiologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1748-1716.1969.tb04414.x · Cited by 256
Metadata
- Authors
- Brown, M. C., Engberg, I., & Matthews, P. B. C.
- Venue
- The Journal of Physiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1967-10
- Volume
- 192
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 773-800
- ISSN
- 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7793
- OpenAlex
- W2022867146
- Cited by
- 465
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 21.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: The relative sensitivity to vibration of muscle receptors of the cat. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1113/jphysiol.1967.sp008330
- The paper
- Brown, M. C., Engberg, I., & Matthews, P. B. C. (1967). The relative sensitivity to vibration of muscle receptors of the cat. The Journal of Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1967.sp008330
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.