BackgroundThe maintenance of the intestinal epithelium is of great importance for the survival of the organism. A possible nervous control of epithelial cell renewal was studied in rats and mice.MethodsMucosal afferent nerves were stimulated by exposing the intestinal mucosa to capsaicin (1.6 mM), which stimulates intestinal external axons. Epithelial cell renewal was investigated in the jejunum by measuring intestinal thymidine kinase (TK) activity, intestinal 3H-thymidine incorporation into DNA, and the number of crypt cells labeled with BrdU. The influence of the external gut innervation was minimized by severing the periarterial nerves.Principal FindingsLuminal capsaicin increased all the studied variables, an effect nervously mediated to judge from inhibitory effects on TK activity or 3H-thymidine incorporation into DNA by exposing the mucosa to lidocaine (a local anesthetic) or by giving four different neurotransmitter receptor antagonists i.v. (muscarinic, nicotinic, neurokinin1 (NK1) or calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP) receptors). After degeneration of the intestinal external nerves capsaicin did not increase TK activity, suggesting the involvement of an axon reflex. Intra-arterial infusion of Substance P (SP) or CGRP increased intestinal TK activity, a response abolished by muscarinic receptor blockade. Immunohistochemistry suggested presence of M3 and M5 muscarinic receptors on the intestinal stem/progenitor cells. We propose that the stem/progenitor cells are controlled by cholinergic nerves, which, in turn, are influenced by mucosal afferent neuron(s) releasing acetylcholine and/or SP and/or CGRP. In mice lacking the capsaicin receptor, thymidine incorporation into DNA and number of crypt cells labeled with BrdU was lower than in wild type animals suggesting that nerves are important also in the absence of luminal capsaicin, a conclusion also supported by the observation that atropine lowered thymidine incorporation into DNA by 60% in control rat segments.ConclusionEnteric nerves are of importance in maintaining the intestinal epithelial barrier.
The effects of muscarinic receptor antagonists on responses to electrical stimulation of the chorda-lingual nerve were determined in pentobarbitone-anesthetized sheep and correlated to the morphology of tissue specimens. Stimulation at 2 Hz continuously, or in bursts of 1 s at 20 Hz every 10 s, for 10 min induced similar submandibular fluid responses (19 +/- 3 vs. 21 +/- 3 microl x min(-1) x g gland(-1)), whereas vasodilatation was greater during stimulation in bursts (-52 +/- 4 vs. -43 +/- 5%; P < 0.01). Continuous stimulation at 8 Hz induced substantially greater responses (66 +/- 9 microl x min(-1) x g gland(-1) and -77 +/- 3%). While atropine (0.5 mg/kg iv) abolished the secretory response at 2 and 20 Hz (1:10 s), a small response persisted at 8 Hz (<5%). The "M1-selective" antagonist pirenzepine (40 microg/kg iv) reduced the fluid response at all frequencies tested (P < 0.05-0.01), most conspicuously at 2 Hz (reduced by 69%). Methoctramine ("M2/M4-selective"; 100 microg/kg iv; n = 5) had no effect on fluid or the vascular responses but increased the protein output at 2 (+90%, P < 0.05) and 8 Hz (+45%, P < 0.05). The immunoblotting showed distinct bands for muscarinic M1, M3, M4, and M5 receptors, and immunohistochemistry showed muscarinic M1 and M3 receptors to occur in the parenchyma. Thus muscarinic M1 receptors contribute to the secretory response to parasympathetic stimulation but have little effect on the vasodilatation in the ovine submandibular gland. Increased transmitter release caused by blockade of neuronal inhibitory receptors of the M4 subtype would explain the increase in protein output.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.