4.5 Article

Cholinergic modulation in the olfactory bulb influences spontaneous olfactory discrimination in adult rats

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 24, Issue 11, Pages 3234-3244

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.05212.x

Keywords

acetylcholine; muscarinic receptors; nicotinic receptors; olfaction; olfactory bulb

Categories

Funding

  1. NIDCD NIH HHS [DC005130] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cholinergic neuromodulation in the olfactory bulb has been hypothesized to regulate mitral cell molecular receptive ranges and the behavioral discrimination of similar odorants. We tested the effects of cholinergic modulation in the olfactory bulb of cannulated rats by bilaterally infusing cholinergic agents into the olfactory bulbs and measuring the rats' performances on separate spontaneous and motivated odor-discrimination tasks. Specifically, 6 mu L/bulb infusions of vehicle (0.9% saline), the muscarinic antagonist scopolamine (7.6 mm and 38 mm), the nicotinic antagonist mecamylamine hydrochloride (3.8 mm and 19 mm), a combination of both antagonists, or the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor neostigmine (8.7 mm) were made 20 min prior to testing on an olfactory cross-habituation task or a rewarded, forced-choice odor-discrimination task. Spontaneous discrimination between chemically related odorants was abolished when nicotinic receptors were blocked in the olfactory bulb, and enhanced when the efficacy of cholinergic inputs was increased with neostigmine. Blocking muscarinic receptors reduced but did not abolish odor discrimination. Interestingly, no behavioral effects of modulating either nicotinic or muscarinic receptors were observed when rats were trained on a reward-motivated odor-discrimination task. Computational modeling of glomerular circuitry demonstrates that known nicotinic cholinergic effects on bulbar neurons suffice to explain these results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available