scholarly journals Peripheral GABA receptors regulate colonic afferent excitability and visceral nociception

2019 ◽  
Vol 597 (13) ◽  
pp. 3425-3439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuel Loeza‐Alcocer ◽  
Thomas P. McPherson ◽  
Michael S. Gold
2020 ◽  
Vol 177 (17) ◽  
pp. 3924-3940
Author(s):  
Christopher Henry ◽  
Thierry Cens ◽  
Pierre Charnet ◽  
Catherine Cohen‐Solal ◽  
Claude Collet ◽  
...  

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 530
Author(s):  
Oliviero Bruni ◽  
Luigi Ferini-Strambi ◽  
Elena Giacomoni ◽  
Paolo Pellegrino

Sleep is an essential component of physical and emotional well-being, and lack, or disruption, of sleep due to insomnia is a highly prevalent problem. The interest in complementary and alternative medicines for treating or preventing insomnia has increased recently. Centuries-old herbal treatments, popular for their safety and effectiveness, include valerian, passionflower, lemon balm, lavender, and Californian poppy. These herbal medicines have been shown to reduce sleep latency and increase subjective and objective measures of sleep quality. Research into their molecular components revealed that their sedative and sleep-promoting properties rely on interactions with various neurotransmitter systems in the brain. Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) is an inhibitory neurotransmitter that plays a major role in controlling different vigilance states. GABA receptors are the targets of many pharmacological treatments for insomnia, such as benzodiazepines. Here, we perform a systematic analysis of studies assessing the mechanisms of action of various herbal medicines on different subtypes of GABA receptors in the context of sleep control. Currently available evidence suggests that herbal extracts may exert some of their hypnotic and anxiolytic activity through interacting with GABA receptors and modulating GABAergic signaling in the brain, but their mechanism of action in the treatment of insomnia is not completely understood.


Author(s):  
Yoshihisa Ozoe

Abstract In the late 1970s, we discovered that toxic bicyclic phosphates inhibit the generation of miniature inhibitory junction potentials, implying their antagonism of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors (GABARs; GABA-gated chloride channels). This unique mode of action provided a strong incentive for our research on GABARs in later years. Furthermore, minor structural changes conferred insect GABAR selectivity to this class of compounds, convincing us of the possibility of GABARs as targets for insecticides. Forty years later, third-generation insecticides acting as allosteric modulator antagonists at a distinctive site of action in insect GABARs were developed. G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are also promising targets for pest control. We characterized phenolamine receptors functionally and pharmacologically. Of the tested receptors, β-adrenergic-like octopamine receptors were revealed to be the most sensitive to the acaricide/insecticide amitraz. Given the presence of multiple sites of action, ion channels and GPCRs remain potential targets for invertebrate pest control.


2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e36-e36
Author(s):  
K. A. Jellinger
Keyword(s):  

1981 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 62-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.J. Enna
Keyword(s):  

1996 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 2005-2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. A. Hare ◽  
W. G. Owen

1. It is widely believed that signals contributing to the receptive field surrounds of retinal bipolar cells pass from horizontal cells to bipolar cells via GABAergic synapses. To test this notion, we applied gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) agonists and antagonists to isolated, perfused retinas of the salamander Ambystoma tigrinum while recording intracellularly from bipolar cells, horizontal cells, and photoreceptors. 2. As we previously reported, administration of the GABA analogue D-aminovaleric acid in concert with picrotoxin did not block horizontal cell responses or the center responses of bipolar cells but blocked the surround responses of both on-center and off-center bipolar cells. 3. Surround responses were not blocked by the GABA, antagonists picrotoxin or bicuculline, the GABAB agonist baclofen or the GABAB antagonist phaclofen, and the GABAC antagonists picrotoxin or cis-4-aminocrotonic acid. Combinations of these drugs were similarly ineffective. 4. GABA itself activated a powerful GABA uptake mechanism in horizontal cells for which nipecotic acid is a competitive agonist. It also activated, both in horizontal cells and bipolar cells, large GABAA conductances that shunted light responses but that could be blocked by picrotoxin or bicuculline. 5. GABA, administered together with picrotoxin to block the shunting effect of GABAA activation, did not eliminate bipolar cell surround responses at concentrations sufficient to saturate the known types of GABA receptors. 6. Surround responses were not blocked by glycine or its antagonist strychnine, or by combinations of drugs designed to eliminate GABAergic and glycinergic pathways simultaneously. 7. Although we cannot fully discount the involvement of a novel GABAergic synapse, the simplest explanation of our findings is that the primary pathway mediating the bipolar cell's surround is neither GABAergic nor glycinergic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document