Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11136863›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of physiology2001

Response properties of isolated mouse olfactory receptor cells.

J Reisert, H R Matthews

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of physiology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

69 citing papers in PubMed, 144 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Role of Olfaction in Dogs: Evolution, Biology, and Human-Oriented Work.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The CaThe Journal of physiology · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Coupling of Mouse Olfactory Bulb Projection Neurons to Fluctuating Odor Pulses.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  11. Ultrasensitivity and bistability in covalent-modification cycles with positive autoregulation.Proceedings. Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The long tale of the calcium activated ClChannels (Austin, Tex.) · 2017
    Review
  20. Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J ReisertPhysiological Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EG, UK. jr10022@hermes.cam.ac.uk
H R Matthews
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Response properties of isolated mouse olfactory receptor cells were investigated using the suction pipette technique. Cells were exposed to the odour cineole or to solutions of modified ionic content by rapidly changing the solution superfusing the cilia. All experiments were performed at 37 degrees C. Mouse olfactory receptor cells displayed a steep dependence of action potential frequency on stimulus concentration, a 3-fold increase in stimulus concentration often saturating the firing frequency at 200-300 Hz. The receptor current increased more gradually with increasing cineole concentration and did not saturate within the 100-fold range of cineole concentrations applied. When stimulated for 30 s with a low odour concentration, cells responded with sporadic spike firing. Higher concentrations led to the generation of a large receptor current at the onset of stimulation which returned to baseline levels within a few seconds, accompanied during its rising phase by a short burst of action potentials. Thereafter an oscillating response pattern was observed during the remainder of the stimulus, consisting of repetitive increases in receptor current of around 1 s duration accompanied by short bursts of action potentials. Olfactory adaptation was studied by comparing the responses to two closely spaced odour stimuli. The response to the second odour stimulus recovered to 80% of its original magnitude when the cell was superfused with Ringer solution during the 5 s interval between odour exposures. In contrast, exposure to a choline-substituted low Na+ solution between odour stimuli had two effects. First, the receptor current response to the first odour stimulus did not terminate as quickly as in the presence of Na+, suggesting the presence of a Na+ -Ca2+ exchanger. Second, the response to the second stimulus only recovered to 55% of its original magnitude, demonstrating the involvement of Na+-Ca2+ exchange in the recovery of sensitivity in mouse olfactory receptor cells following stimulation.

Indexed as

CyclohexanolsMonoterpenesTerpenesAction PotentialsAnimalsCholineCiliaElectrophysiologyEucalyptolIn Vitro TechniquesMaleMentholMiceMice, Inbred C57BLNootropic AgentsOdorantsCholineCyclohexanolsEucalyptolMentholMonoterpenesNootropic AgentsSodium-Calcium ExchangerTerpenes

Identifiers

PMID11136863
PMCPMC2278387
OpenAlexW2089655323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.