HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lisney, S J Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lisney, S J

1. The responses of nerves which could be excited by electrical stimulation of the canine tooth-pulp were recorded from the trigeminal ganglion. 2. Preliminary experiments showed that the responses of mandibular canine pulpal afferents were recorded from the postero-lateral part of the trigeminal ganglion whereas the responses of maxillary canine pulpal afferents were recorded from the central part of the ganglion. 3. The conduction velocity differed in various parts of these nerves; the conduction velocity inside the tooth tended to be slower than that from the tooth to the trigeminal ganglion; the mean conduction velocity in the part of the nerve peripheral to the trigeminal ganglion was faster than that in the part central to the ganglion, and in the central part the conduction velocity decreased caudally. 4. Collision experiments combining tooth stimulation and stimulation of sites in the trigeminal sensory nuclear complex were carried out to investigate the projections of individual pulpal afferents. 5. The results of these experiments showed that some tooth-pulp afferents bifurcate and project to both the main sensory nucleus and the nucleus caudalis. For other pulpal afferents only a projection to the main sensory nucleus or the nucleus caudalis could be demonstrated. 6. Pulpal afferents that bifurcated had faster conduction velocities than those for which no bifurcation could be shown.