QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by HARDIE, R. C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by HARDIE, R. C.

Journal of Experimental Biology 138,221-241 (1988)
Published by Company of Biologists 1988

Effects of Antagonists on Putative Histamine Receptors in the First Visual Neuropile of the Housefly (Musca Domestica)

ROGER C. HARDIE ¹

¹ Cambridge University, Department of Zoology Downing St, Cambridge CB2 3EJ

Intracellular recordings were made from the large monopolar cells (LMCs), which are the cells postsynaptic to photoreceptors, in the housefly Musca domestica. A multi-barrelled ionophoretic pipette glued to the recording electrode was used to apply a variety of cholinergic and histaminergic antagonists onto the recorded neurones. All substances which blocked the physiological response to light also antagonized the response to ionophoretically applied histamine, supporting the hypothesis that histamine is the neurotransmitter released by insect photoreceptors. In order of potency, the following drugs were found to block or reduce the LMCs responses to light: benzoquinonium gallamine > ranitidine atropine cimetidine > metiamideSK&F93479 mepyramine. Mecamylamine, scopolamine, dexetimide, nicotine, mequitazine, chlorpheniramine and clemastine were ineffective.

Two other cholinergic ligands, hexamethonium and decamethonium, were much more potent than even benzoquinonium, but had the effect of facilitating and greatly slowing down the responses to light. Responses evoked by acetylcholine showed a different pharmacology, being blocked by mecamylamine but unaffected by hexamethonium. Despite testing a number of known cholinergic and histaminergic agents, no effective agonist for histamine was found. The results indicate the existence of a novel class of histamine-sensitive receptor with nicotinic features. In addition the unusual effects of a traditional HI agonist, 2-thiazolylethylamine, suggested the presence of a second, distinct class of histamine receptor.

Key words: histamine, receptors, insect, fly, visual system

Accepted on April 26, 1988

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. A. Borycz, J. Borycz, A. Kubow, R. Kostyleva, and I. A. Meinertzhagen Histamine Compartments of the Drosophila Brain With an Estimate of the Quantum Content at the Photoreceptor Synapse J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2005; 93(3): 1611 - 1619. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C Benkenstein, M Schmidt, and M Gewecke Voltage-activated whole-cell K+ currents in lamina cells of the desert locust schistocerca gregaria J. Exp. Biol., January 7, 1999; 202(14): 1939 - 1951. [Abstract] [PDF]