Abstract
Electrical recording from small twigs of nerve in a tortoise showed that olfactory, vomeronasal, and trigeminal receptors in the nose are responsive to various odorants. No one kind of receptor was most sensitive to all odorants. For controlled stimulation, odorant was caused to appear in a stream of gas already flowing through the nose. Of the parameters definable at the naris, temperature, relative humidity, and nature of inert gas had little effect on olfactory responses to amyl acetate, whereas odorant species, odorant concentration, and volume flow rate effectively determined the responses of all nasal chemoreceptors. An intrinsic variable of accessibility to the receptors, particularly olfactory, was demonstrated. Flow dependence of chemoreceptor responses is thought to reflect the necessity for delivery of odorant molecules to receptor sites. Since the olfactory receptors are relatively exposed, plateauing of the response with flow rate for slightly soluble odorants suggests an approach to concentration equilibrium in the overlying mucus with that in the air entering the naris. Accordingly, data for responses to amyl acetate were fitted with Beidler's (1954) taste equation for two kinds of sites being active. The requirement for finite aqueous solubility, if true, suggests substitution of aqueous solutions for gaseous solutions. A suitable medium was found and results conformed to expectations. Olfactory receptors were insensitive to variation of ionic strength, pH, and osmotic pressure.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (2.1 MB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- ADRIAN E. D. The electrical activity of the mammalian olfactory bulb. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1950 Nov;2(4):377–388. doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(50)90075-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- ADRIAN L. The action of the mammalian olfactory organ. J Laryngol Otol. 1956 Jan;70(1):1–14. doi: 10.1017/s0022215100052609. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- ALLISON A. C., WARWICK R. T. T. Quantitative observations on the olfactory system of the rabbit. Brain. 1949 Jun;72(Pt 2):186–197. doi: 10.1093/brain/72.2.186. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Adrian E. D. Olfactory reactions in the brain of the hedgehog. J Physiol. 1942 Mar 31;100(4):459–473. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1942.sp003955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- COHEN G. N., MONOD J. Bacterial permeases. Bacteriol Rev. 1957 Sep;21(3):169–194. doi: 10.1128/br.21.3.169-194.1957. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- GASSER H. S. Olfactory nerve fibers. J Gen Physiol. 1956 Mar 20;39(4):473–496. doi: 10.1085/jgp.39.4.473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- NEGUS V. The function of the paranasal sinuses. AMA Arch Otolaryngol. 1957 Oct;66(4):430–442. doi: 10.1001/archotol.1957.03830280060007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- OTTOSON D. Analysis of the electrical activity of the olfactory epithelium. Acta Physiol Scand Suppl. 1955;35(122):1–83. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- OTTOSON D. Sustained potentials evoked by olfactory stimulation. Acta Physiol Scand. 1954 Dec 31;32(4):384–386. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-1716.1954.tb01186.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- TAKAGI S. F., SHIBUYA T. The electrical activity of the olfactory epithelium studied with micro- and macro-electrodes. Jpn J Physiol. 1960 Aug 15;10:385–395. doi: 10.2170/jjphysiol.10.385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- UEKI S., DOMINO E. F. Some evidence for a mechanical receptor in olfactory function. J Neurophysiol. 1961 Jan;24:12–25. doi: 10.1152/jn.1961.24.1.12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]