Intraoral mechanoreceptor activity during jaw movement in the anesthetized rabbit.

Appenteng, Kwabena; Lund, James P.; Séguin, J. J.

doi:10.1152/jn.1982.48.1.27

Cited by 98 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…the findings in the rabbit (Appenteng et al ., 1982). A majority of the mechanoreceptive afferent units in the skin of the human face are slowly adapting and have small and well-defined receptive fields (type SAI).…”

Section: T Emporomandibularjoint(tmj) Afferentssupporting

confidence: 59%

Reflex Control of Human Jaw Muscles

Türker

2002

Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The main function of the masticatory muscles is to break food down into pieces small enough to be swallowed. These are strong muscles that generate very large forces across very short distances and apply themvia rigid teeth. Such large forces can easily damage the teeth and their supporting tissues, tongue, cheeks, and the joints unless they are controlled precisely and effectively. There is evidence that the masticatory forces are controlled very precisely and that these forces change from bite to bite, depending on the consistency of the bolus. However, we do not fully understand this control mechanism. Unless the details of the mechanism that controls the masticatory forces in health and disease are thoroughly understood, the diagnosis and treatment of masticatory-related dysfunctions (such as temporomandibular dysfunction) will remain at the present "symptomatic" state.The aim of this review is to discuss what is known about the control of the human masticatory system and to propose a method for standardized investigation. This review is divided into six parts. The first part discusses the activation of human jaw muscle motoneurons by the central and peripheral sources. The second part discusses the receptors that are thought to contribute to the control of human mastication. In part 3, the reflexes elicited in human subjects are discussed. In part 4, simulated chewing experiments are discussed. In part 5, recording and analyzing methods are discussed, and a new method for estimating synaptic potential in human motoneurons is introduced. Finally, in part 6, three frequently asked questions are used to discuss the issues put forward in this review.Presently, our knowledge of mastication and its control by various receptors is patchy. Most of the work in this area comes from animal species with which investigators have used widely varying reduction techniques (anesthetization, decerebration, curarization, etc.). In these preparations, when nerve pathways are the subject of the study, the nerve to be stimulated is dissected free and teased so that one or a few identified nerve fibers are stimulated. The synaptic potential that is induced by this stimulation is recorded by means of microelectrodes that are placed within the central nervous system (reviewed in Lund, 1991;Linden, 1990). It is also possible for investigators to initiate "chewing" in animal preparations, and to study the effects of various receptor systems on the development of force (Lavigne et al ., 1987;.In humans, one must establish the connections of various afferents to the motoneurons that innervate the masticatory muscles under static or dynamic conditions to begin to understand the mechanism and control of mastication. The human work is challenging, since direct recording from motoneurons is not yet possible and precise stimulation of nerves is not easily controlled. Therefore, various indirect measurements have been used for the study of synaptic potential in human subjects. In most of these studies, afferent nerves are stimul...

show abstract

Section: T Emporomandibularjoint(tmj) Afferentssupporting

confidence: 59%

Reflex Control of Human Jaw Muscles

Türker

2002

Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All that is needed is negative feed-back regulation of the contraction strength of the closer muscles. Lund et al (1981) were concerned that excitation of low-threshold mechanoreceptor afferents during mastication (Appenteng et al 1982) might disrupt the masticatory cycle. It was then demonstrated (Lund et al 1984) that the JOR, elicited by relatively low strength (but uncontrolled) stimulation of the IAN in awake cats was reduced during the active closing phase of mastication.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Individually they are sensitive and selective with respect to direction of the applied force (Pfaffman, 1939;Sakada & Kamio, 1970;Mei, Hartmann & Roubien, 1975). Being well adapted to detecting active muscle force (Larson, Smith & Luschei, 1981;Appenteng, Lund & Seguin, 1982), they may be included with muscle spindles, tendon organs and temporo-mandibular joint receptors as important proprioceptors of the jaw.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of periodontal receptors in the jaw‐opening reflex in the cat.

Dessem

Iyadurai

Taylor

1988

The Journal of Physiology

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. In anaesthetized cats, graded electrical stimulation of the inferior alveolar nerve at just above threshold for the largest afferent fibres caused inhibition of jaw‐closer motoneurones. Stimulus strength had to be increased to 1.5 times threshold with double shocks to cause reflex contraction of the digastric muscle. 2. Inhibition of jaw‐closer muscles and excitation of digastric muscle resulted from transients of force applied to the upper canine tooth. However, the threshold for the digastric response was approximately 11 times higher than that of the periodontal afferent units recorded in the mesencephalic nucleus of the fifth nerve (MesV). Vibration of the upper canine at 50 Hz, with amplitude adequate to excite periodontal afferents, caused no digastric contraction. 3. Stimulation in the caudal part of the MesV so as to excite periodontal afferents caused no digastric reflex, provided that the stimulus did not spread to other parts of the fifth nerve nuclei. 4. It is concluded that under these conditions the low‐threshold periodontal mechanoreceptors cause inhibition of jaw‐closer muscles, but no significant excitation of jaw‐opener muscles. 5. These findings are discussed from the point of view of the control which periodontal mechanoreceptors may exert over the biting force during mastication.

show abstract

“…gingiva, cementum, periodontal ligament and the alveolus (British Standards, 1983) and have loosely been described as 'periodontal mechanoreceptors' (for reviews see Hannam, 1982;Linden, 1989). Electrophysiological studies have demonstrated that the cell bodies of these mechanoreceptors are found in two anatomically distinct sites: the mesencephalic nucleus of the fifth cranial nerve (Corbin & Harrison, 1940;Jerge, 1963;Cody, Lee & Taylor, 1972;Linden, 1978;Amano & Iwasaki, 1982;Cash & Linden, 1982a;Passatore, Lucchi, Filippi, Manni & Bortolami, 1983) and the trigeminal ganglion (Kerr & Lysak, 1964;Beaudreau & Jerge, 1968; Mei, Hartmann & Roubien, 1970, 2-2 1975; Appenteng, Lund & Seguin, 1982;Cash & Linden, 1982 a). However, in all of these studies the precise locations of the receptors were not determined; they could have been situated in any of the tissues in the periodontium.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution of mesencephalic nucleus and trigeminal ganglion mechanoreceptors in the periodontal ligament of the cat.

Bellows

1989

The Journal of Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. In anaesthetized cats recordings have been made in the mesencephalic nucleus of the fifth cranial nerve and the trigeminal ganglion from neurones that respond when forces are applied to the mandibular canine tooth. The site of the mechanoreceptors in the periodontal ligament and their distribution around the tooth root have been determined. 2. Receptors with their cell bodies in the mesencephalic nucleus were found to be situated in the periodontal ligament in a discrete area intermediate between the fulcrum and apex of the tooth, while those in the trigeminal ganglion were situated in the whole area of the periodontal ligament between the fulcrum and apex of the tooth. 3. All of the located mechanoreceptors responded maximally when that part of the ligament in which they lay was put under tension. 4. The directional sensitivities of the mechanoreceptors suggested that there was an uneven distribution around the tooth root of receptors with cell bodies in the mesencephalic nucleus. In contrast mechanoreceptors with cell bodies in the trigeminal ganglion were distributed more equally around the tooth root. The rationale for the differences requires further investigation.

show abstract

Intraoral mechanoreceptor activity during jaw movement in the anesthetized rabbit.

Cited by 98 publications

References 0 publications

Reflex Control of Human Jaw Muscles

Reflex Control of Human Jaw Muscles

The role of periodontal receptors in the jaw‐opening reflex in the cat.

Distribution of mesencephalic nucleus and trigeminal ganglion mechanoreceptors in the periodontal ligament of the cat.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About