{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016254876462938883, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004551365409622887, 'mean_word_length': 5.4125, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Classification of muscarinic responses in hippocampus in terms of receptor subtypes and second-messenger systems: electrophysiological studies in vitro

The hippocampal slice preparation was used to classify cholinergic effects in terms of muscarinic receptor subtypes (M1 or M2) and biochemical effector systems linked to these effects in CA1 pyramidal cells. Based on the action of the M1 antagonist pirenzepine and the M2 antagonist gallamine, the muscarinic-induced membrane depolarization and blockade of the afterhyperpolarization appear to result from activation of an M1 receptor, while the cholinergic depression of the EPSP and the blockade of a potassium current termed the M-current appears to involve the activation of an M2 receptor. All of the muscarinic actions could be observed in pertussis toxin-treated hippocampi, suggesting that a pertussis toxin-sensitive G-protein is not involved in these actions. Cholinergic agents that are weak agonists of phosphoinositide (PI) turnover are fully effective in all of the muscarinic actions except the blockade of the M-current on which they had little agonist activity and actually blocked the action of full agonists. These results strongly suggest that the blockade of the M-current may involve stimulation of PI turnover. In addition, we show that the blockade of the M-current is mimicked by intracellular application of inositol trisphosphate. Our results do not show any obvious relationship between the muscarinic receptor subtypes and the biochemical effector systems.