Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Chemosensitivity of fine afferents from rat skin in vitro

Lang, E., Novak, A., Reeh, P. W., Handwerker, H. O.·1990·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

1. Properties of sensory receptors with slowly conducting nerve fibers (less than 10 m/s) were studied using a rat skin-saphenous nerve in vitro preparation where receptive fields of identified single units can be isolated and superfused at the corium side with defined chemical solutions. 2. With mechanical search stimuli, 150 slowly adapting units were identified, 88% C-fibers, and the remainder, A delta-fibers. The majority of these units (65%) were categorized as mechano-heat sensitive ("polymodal") with controlled radiant heat stimulation. The remaining units were classified as low- or high-threshold mechanoreceptors according to their von Frey thresholds. 3. Bradykinin (BK), in concentrations of 10(-8) to 10(-4) M, was repeatedly applied for 1 min at 10-min intervals. Fifty-six percent of the polymodal C-fibers responded to BK (up to 10(-5) M), in contrast to 17% of the heat-insensitive units (P less than 0.01). No correlation between BK sensitivity and conduction velocity or von Frey threshold was found. 4. The BK "threshold concentrations" to excite C- and A delta-fibers were about equally distributed over a range from 10(-8) to 10(-5) M. 5. There was a large interindividual variability in pattern and magnitude of the response to BK. Intraindividually, a marked tachyphylaxis upon repeated BK stimulation was observed. 6. In fibers with a slow development of tachyphylaxis, the effects of conditioning application of different chemicals on BK responsiveness were studied. Norepinephrine in 10(-7) M concentration did not produce a significant effect, whereas 10(-5) M and 10(-4) M seemed to increase the BK responses. 7. Prostaglandin E2 (10(-6) M) caused a weak sensitization to BK on average (n.s.), but serotonin (10(-6) M) was clearly effective (P less than 0.05). 8. The strongest sensitization to BK (P = 0.01) resulted from conditioning heat stimulation, which also uncovered a responsiveness in some units initially insensitive to BK. 9. In some experiments the calcium concentration in the superfusate of receptive fields was lowered to 0.3 mM, which induced ongoing activity in C-fibers and markedly increased the BK responses in two polymodal units tested. Increasing the calcium concentration to 3.0 mM reversed these effects. 10. After completing the BK test protocol, polymodal C-fibers were exposed to other chemicals.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1990.63.4.887

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 295

Metadata

Authors
Lang, E., Novak, A., Reeh, P. W., & Handwerker, H. O.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
1990-04-01
Volume
63
Issue
4
Pages
887-901
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2228456721
Cited by
295
References
0
FWCI
8.64
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: Chemosensitivity of fine afferents from rat skin in vitro. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jn.1990.63.4.887
The paper
Lang, E., Novak, A., Reeh, P. W., & Handwerker, H. O. (1990). Chemosensitivity of fine afferents from rat skin in vitro. Journal of Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1990.63.4.887

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.