spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif Online submission spacer gif
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MURRAY, R. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by MURRAY, R. W.
Journal of Experimental Biology 39,119-128 (1962)
Published by Company of Biologists 1962


The Response of the Ampullae of Lorenzini of Elasmobranchs to Electrical Stimulation

R. W. MURRAY 1

1 Department of Zoology and Comparative Physiology, Birmingham University

1. The ampullae of Lorenzini are sensitive to weak electrical stimuli which presumably cause currents to flow along the jelly-filled tubes of the sense organ. Increase of the resting frequency occurs when the tube-opening is made negative to the capsule, and inhibition when the opening is positive, with opposite after-effects in each case. Adaptation is three-quarters complete in about 5 sec.

2. When the stimulus is applied as a voltage gradient in the water overlying the ampullae, the threshold for the most sensitive units is 1 µV./cm., which represents a current along the tube of less than 5 x 10-11 A.

3. When the stimulus is applied as a current directly to the tube opening, the threshold for the most sensitive units is 4 x 10-10 A.

4. Changes in the salinity of the water at the tube opening are also effective, the threshold being about 3%. Dilution causes excitation, and concentration causes inhibition. The response is not due to the osmotic differences, and so probably results from potentials established at the jelly-water interface.

Submitted on October 16, 1961




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Exp. Biol.Home page
B. R. Brown
Modeling an electrosensory landscape: behavioral and morphological optimization in elasmobranch prey capture
J. Exp. Biol., April 1, 2002; 205(7): 999 - 1007.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ScienceHome page
A. Kalmijn
Electric and magnetic field detection in elasmobranch fishes
Science, November 26, 1982; 218(4575): 916 - 918.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
ScienceHome page
R. Fields and G. Lange
Electroreception in the ratfish (Hydrolagus colliei)
Science, February 1, 1980; 207(4430): 547 - 548.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
ScienceHome page
Y. Katsuki and T. Hashimoto
Shark Pit Organs: Enhancement of Mechanosensitivity by Potassium Ions
Science, December 5, 1969; 166(3910): 1287 - 1289.
[Abstract] [PDF]




© The Company of Biologists Ltd 1962