J Physiol Wellcome Trust-funded researchers
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Physiol Volume 586, Number 8, 2043-2048, April 15, 2008 DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2008.150870
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
586/8/2043    most recent
jphysiol.2008.150870v1
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Guyenet, P. G.
Right arrow Articles by Bayliss, D. A.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Guyenet, P. G.
Right arrow Articles by Bayliss, D. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Review articles
Right arrow Neuroscience

TOPICAL REVIEW

Retrotrapezoid nucleus and central chemoreception

Patrice G. Guyenet1, Ruth L. Stornetta1 and Douglas A. Bayliss1

1 Department of Pharmacology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA

The ‘distributed chemoreception theory’ attributes the central chemoreflex (the stimulation of breathing by CNS acidification) to the cumulative effects of pH on multiple classes of respiratory neurons as well as on their tonic sources of drive. Opinions differ as to how many classes of pH-sensitive neurons contribute to the central chemoreflex but the number of candidates is high and growing fast. The ‘specialized chemoreceptor theory’, endorsed here, attributes the chemoreflex to a limited number of specialized neurons. These neurons (the central chemoreceptors) would drive a respiratory pattern generator that is not or minimally activated by acidification. In this review we first describe the properties of the retrotrapezoid nucleus (RTN) and argue that this nucleus may contain the most important central chemoreceptors. Next, we subject the assumptions that underlie the distributed chemoreception theory to a critical analysis. We propose several explanations for the apparent contradiction between the two competing theories of central chemoreception. We attribute much of the current controversy to premature extrapolations of the effects of acidification on neurons recorded in vitro (chemosensitivity) and to a semantic confusion between chemosensitivity and chemoreception (the mechanism by which CO2 or pH activates breathing in vivo).

(Received 8 January 2008; accepted after revision 11 February 2008; first published online 28 February 2008)
Corresponding author P. G. Guyenet: University of Virginia Health System, P.O. Box 800735, 1300 Jefferson Park Avenue, Charlottesville, VA 22908-0735, USA. Email: pgg{at}virginia.edu







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 The Physiological Society.