4.5 Article

Role of the carotid bodies in chemosensory ventilatory responses in the anesthetized mouse

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 97, Issue 4, Pages 1401-1407

Publisher

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00025.2004

Keywords

carotid sinus nerve; chemodenervation; chemoreceptor; hypoxia; hypercapnia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examined the effects of carotid body denervation on ventilatory responses to normoxia (21% O-2 in N-2 for 240 s), hypoxic hypoxia (10 and 15% O-2 in N-2 for 90 and 120 s, respectively), and hyperoxic hypercapnia (5% CO2 in O-2 for 240 s) in the spontaneously breathing urethane-anesthetized mouse. Respiratory measurements were made with a whole body, single-chamber plethysmograph before and after cutting both carotid sinus nerves. Baseline measurements in air showed that carotid body denervation was accompanied by lower minute ventilation with a reduction in respiratory frequency. On the basis of measurements with an open-circuit system, no significant differences in O-2 consumption or CO2 production before and after chemodenervation were found. During both levels of hypoxia, animals with intact sinus nerves had increased respiratory frequency, tidal volume, and minute ventilation; however, after chemodenervation, animals experienced a drop in respiratory frequency and ventilatory depression. Tidal Volume responses during 15% hypoxia were similar before and after carotid body denervation; during 10% hypoxia in chemodenervated animals, there was a sudden increase in tidal volume with an increase in the rate of inspiration, suggesting that gasping occurred. During hyperoxic hypercapnia, ventilatory responses were lower with a smaller tidal volume after chemodenervation than before. We conclude that the carotid bodies are essential for maintaining ventilation during eupnea, hypoxia, and hypercapnia in the anesthetized mouse.

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