Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11425921›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2001

Distribution of gustatory sensitivities in rat taste cells: whole-cell responses to apical chemical stimulation.

T A Gilbertson, J D Boughter, H Zhang, D V Smith

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Taste Receptor Signaling.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The cell biology of taste.The Journal of cell biology · 2010
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Coding in the mammalian gustatory system.Trends in neurosciences · 2010
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Breadth of tuning and taste coding in mammalian taste buds.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2007
    Article
  19. The neural processing of taste.BMC neuroscience · 2007
    Review
  20. Signal transduction and information processing in mammalian taste buds.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2007
    Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

T A GilbertsonPennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70808-4124, USA.
J D Boughter
H Zhang
D V Smith
Pennington Biomedical Research Center · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

SENSORY CODING IN TASTER01DC000353 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCI CTR · PI BOUGHTER, JOHN D · 1989 to 2014
$4.5M
Taste Transduction and its RegulationR01DC002507 · NIDCD · UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY · PI GILBERTSON, TIMOTHY A. · 2003 to 2007
$1.2M
MINORITY PREDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP PROGRAMF31DC000353 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI DEWULF, VALERIE D · 1998 to 1999
–
SALT TASTE TRANSDUCTION AND ITS HORMONAL REGULATIONR29DC002507 · NIDCD · LSU PENNINGTON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CTR · PI GILBERTSON, TIMOTHY A. · 1995 to 1999
–
NIDCD NIH HHS DC00353NIDCD NIH HHS DC02507NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC000353NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC000353NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC002507NIDCD NIH HHS R29 DC002507
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several taste transduction mechanisms have been demonstrated in mammals, but little is known about their distribution within and across receptor cells. We recorded whole-cell responses of 120 taste cells of the rat fungiform papillae and soft palate maintained within the intact epithelium in a modified Ussing chamber, which allowed us to flow tastants across the apical membrane while monitoring the activity of the cell with a patch pipette. Taste stimuli were: 0.1 m sucrose, KCl, and NH(4)Cl, 0.032 m NaCl, and 3.2 mm HCl and quinine hydrochloride (QHCl). When cells were held at their resting potentials, taste stimulation resulted in conductance changes; reversible currents >5 pA were considered reliable responses. Sucrose and QHCl produced a decrease in outward current and membrane conductance, whereas NaCl, KCl, NH(4)Cl, and HCl elicited inward currents accompanied by increased conductance. Combinations of responses to pairs of the four basic stimuli (sucrose, NaCl, HCl, and QHCl) across the 71-84 cells tested with each pair were predictable from the probabilities of responses to individual stimuli, indicating an independent distribution of sensitivities. Of 62 cells tested with all four basic stimuli, 59 responded to at least one of the stimuli; 16 of these (27.1%) responded to only one, 20 (33.9%) to two, 15 (25.4%) to three, and 8 (13.6%) to all of the basic stimuli. Cells with both inward (Na(+)) and outward (K(+)) voltage-activated currents were significantly more broadly tuned to gustatory stimuli than those with only inward currents.

Indexed as

Ammonium ChlorideAnimalsChemoreceptor CellsCitric AcidDiffusion Chambers, CultureEpitheliumHydrochloric AcidIn Vitro TechniquesMembrane PotentialsPalate, SoftPatch-Clamp TechniquesPotassiumPotassium ChlorideQuinineRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyAmmonium ChlorideCitric AcidHydrochloric AcidPotassiumPotassium ChlorideQuinineSodiumSodium ChlorideSucrose

Identifiers

PMID11425921
PMCPMC6762376
OpenAlexW1956714534

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.