Biol Reprod Keystone Symposia Conference on Frontiers in Reproductive Biology & Regulation of Fertility.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Buchanan, G. D.
Right arrow Articles by Garfield, R. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Buchanan, G. D.
Right arrow Articles by Garfield, R. E.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Buchanan, G. D.
Right arrow Articles by Garfield, R. E.

Biology of Reproduction, Vol 42, 207-216, Copyright © 1990 by Society for the Study of Reproduction


ARTICLES

Functional innervation of the myometrium of Myotis lucifugus, the little brown bat

GD Buchanan and RE Garfield
Department of Biomedical Sciences McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Myometria of pregnant and nonpregnant Myotis lucifugus were studied in vitro by using electrical field stimulation as well as autonomic agonists and antagonists to determine whether functional responses corresponded with structural evidence showing abundant adrenergic and sparse cholinergic innervation, which uniquely does not disappear during pregnancy. Field stimulation (70 V, 0.6 ms, 5.0-s pulse train, 2.5 - 60 Hz) of myometria from nonpregnant (hibernating) bats produced graded responses consisting of an initial alpha-adrenergic contraction and a subsequent beta-adrenergic relaxation phase. Responses were sensitive to both the nerve poison tetrodotoxin and the adrenergic antagonist guanethidine, demonstrating that they resulted from stimulation of intrinsic adrenergic nerves. Field stimulation responses were unaffected by atropine indicating that there was no functional cholinergic innervation, even though carbachol-induced contraction showed that muscarinic receptors were present. In contrast, functional innervation of cervical tissue was cholinergic and nonadrenergic-non- cholinergic, but not adrenergic. At the beginning of active gestation, some myometrial preparations exhibited little of no response to field stimulation. However, as uterine size increased, the biphasic response to field stimulation was enhanced, particularly the inhibitory (beta- adrenergic) phase. Moreover, the contractile phases, though reduced, was not abolished by alpha-adrenergic antagonists. The residual contractile response was also tetrodotoxin-resistant, suggesting that the myometrium was sensitive to direct electrical stimulation. Near the end of pregnancy, myometrial tissue became nonresponsive to both field stimulation and autonomic agonists, suggesting an absence of available receptor sites on muscle cells.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by the Society for the Study of Reproduction.