延髓腹外侧区在降压反射中的作和

在各种心血管反射中,降压反射是最主要的,延髓腹外侧区在降压反射中起重要作用,目前认为降压反射中枢通路中至少有四种成分是最基本的：（１）孤束核中的神经元;（２）延髓腹外侧头端的交感前运动细胞;（３）延髓腹外侧尾端;（４）疑核或／和迷走神经背运动核。此外,兴奋性与抑制性氨基酸受体和抑制性神经元也是中枢通路的关键成分,下丘脑视上核与室旁核的升压素分泌细胞也有一定作用。     

延髓腹外侧区在降压反射中的作用

在各种心血管反射中,降压反射是最主要的,延髓腹外侧区在降压反射中起重要作用。目前认为降压反射中枢通路中至少有四种成分是最基本的：（１）孤束核中的神经元;（２）延髓腹外侧头端的交感前运动细胞;（３）延髓腹外侧尾端;（４）疑核或和迷走神经背运动核。此外,兴奋性与抑制性氨基酸受体和抑制性神经元也是中枢通路的关键成分。下丘脑视上核与室旁核的升压素分泌细胞也有一定作用     

大鼠延髓腹外侧表面化学感受区与延髓内部核团的联系

本文采用辣根过氧化物酶（ＨＲＰ）组化方法,对大鼠延髓腹外侧表面化学感受区与延髓内部核团之间的神经结构联系进行了系统的探查。实验在３０只麻醉且自主呼吸的雄性ＳＤ大鼠上分四组进行。用ＨＲＰ滤纸分别局部敷贴于延髓腹外侧表面的头端化学感受区（Ｒ区,ｎ＝１０）、尾端化学感受区（Ｃ区,ｎ＝１０）、中间区（Ｉ区,ｎ＝６）和对照区（ｎ＝４）。动物存活２４ｈ后,检查ＨＲＰ标记细胞所在的核团部位。（１）于Ｒ区表面敷贴     

延髓头端腹外侧区注入肾上腺素对血液流变学的影响

实验用ＳＤ雄性大鼠７８只,采用束缚方法引起应激性高血粘度和血压升高。结果：（１）清醒大鼠束缚２ｄ可引起应激性高血粘度和血压升高。（２）双侧延髓头端腹外侧区（ｒＶＬＭ）微量注射肾上腺素（Ｅ,每侧０．５μｇ／０．５μｌ）可引起血粘度明显增高,此作用可预先在双侧ｒＶＬＭ注入α肾上腺素能受体阻断剂酚妥拉明所阻断,不能被β－肾上腺能受体阻断剂心得安所阻断。用同样剂量Ｅ注入双侧延髓尾端腹外侧区（ｃＶＬＭ）或静     

延髓腹外侧区微量注射L－NNA和SNP对大鼠血压、心率和肾交感神经活动的影响

在麻醉大鼠观察了向延髓腹外侧区微量注射ＮＯ合成酶抑制剂Ｎ－硝基左旋精氨酸（ＬＮＮＡ）和硝普钢（ＳＮＰ）对血压、心率和肾交感神经活动的影响,旨在探讨中枢左旋精氨酸－ＮＯ通路在动脉血压调节中的作用及其机制。实验结果如下：（１）向延髓腹外侧头端区（ＲＶＬＭ）注射Ｌ－ＮＮＡ后,平均动脉压（ＭＡＰ）升高,肾交感神经活动（ＲＳＮＡ）增强;心率（ＨＲ）减慢,但无统计学意义。ＭＡＰ和ＲＳＮＡ的变化持续３０ｍｉｎ以上;此效应可被预先静注左旋精氨酸所逆转。（２）向ＲＶＬＭ微量注射ＳＮＰ,ＭＡＰ降低,ＲＳＮＡ减弱;但ＨＲ的变化无统计学意义。（３）向延髓腹外侧尾端区（ＣＶＬＭ）注射Ｌ－ＮＮＡ,ＭＡＰ降低,ＨＲ减慢,ＲＳＮＡ减弱。（４）向ＣＶＬＭ微量注射ＳＮＰ,ＭＡＰ升高,ＲＳＮＡ增强,而心率无明显变化。以上结果表明,中枢左旋精氨酸－ＮＯ通路对延髓腹外侧部的神经元活动有调变作用。     

家兔延髓腹侧区内注射吗啡对刺激下丘脑诱发室性期前收缩的抑制作用

家免63只,用乌拉坦(700mg/kg)和氯醛醣(35mg/kg)静脉麻醉,三碘季铵酚制动,在人工呼吸下进行实验。用电刺激下丘脑近中线区的方法诱发定性期前收缩(HVE)。双侧延髓腹侧区内微量注射吗啡(5μg 溶于0.5—1μl 中)可抑制 HVE。在双侧延髓腹侧区微量注射纳洛酬(2μg 溶于0.5—1μl 中)能阻断电刺激中缝核尾端或中缝核尾端内微量注射 L-谷氨酸钠(50mmol/L,0.5—1μl)对 HVE 的抑制效应,也能减少或消除刺激腓深神经对 HVE 的抑制作用。上述结果提示,延髓腹侧部阿片受体的激活可抑制 HVE;另外,腓深神经传入冲动也可能通过中缝核尾端激活延髓腹侧区的阿片受体而抑制 HVE。     

延髓头端腹外侧区在躯体传入冲动抑制中枢性心肌缺血中的作用

电刺激麻醉家免延髓头端腹外侧区(rVLM)能诱发心外膜电图ST段明显抬高。刺激腓深神经能抑制这种反应。P5平面横断脑干、双侧电解损毁中脑中央灰质腹侧部(vPAG)或在双侧rVLM微量注射脑啡肽抗体后,均能明显减弱腓深神经的抑制作用。以上结果提示腓深神经能够抑制由rVLM诱发的心肌缺血反应。腓深神经的这种抑制效应可能有赖于中脑头端以上某些区域脑结构的完整,vPAG可能是这种抑制效应的中枢环节之一,延髓水平的脑啡肽可能参与这种抑制过程。     

乙酰胆碱对离体大鼠延髓头端腹外侧区神经元自发放电的影响

在８９张Ｓｐｒａｇｕｅ－Ｄａｗｌｅｙ大鼠延髓脑片,用玻璃微电极记录到１６５个延髓头端腹外侧区神经元的自发放电,其放电形式有三种：规则型;不规则型,静息型,乙酰胆碱对自发放电有兴奋,抑制双相和无影响四种效应,各占所测试神经元数的４１．８％,２０％,３％和自发放电有兴奋,抑制双相和无双相和影响四种效应,各占所有测试神经元数的４１．８％,２０％,３Ｔ和３５．２％。     

肾缺血增强大鼠延髓腹外侧头端区神经元电话动和Fos蛋白表达

在67只切断两侧缓冲神经的麻醉Sprague-Dawley大鼠,应用细胞外记录的电生理方法和免疫组织化学技术,分别观察肾缺血对延髓腹外侧头端区巨细胞旁外侧核神经元自发放电活动和Fos蛋白表达的影响.所得结果如下(1)左肾动脉阻断后,28个单位的放电频率由11.40±1.08增至21.1±1.74spikes/s(P<0.001),血压和心率无明显变化(P>0.05);(2)在17个放电单位中,应用腺苷受体拮抗剂8-苯茶碱(8-phenyltheophylline,10mg/kg)可明显抑制肾缺血的兴奋效应(P<0.05);(3)肾缺血后,延髓腹外侧头端区的Fos蛋白样免疫反应神经元显著增加(P<0.01);(4)预先应用8-苯茶碱可明显减弱肾缺血所激活的Fos蛋白表达反应(P<0.05).以上结果提示肾缺血增强延髓腹外侧头端区神经元的放电活动和Fos蛋白表达,而此作用可能与肾脏缺血所产生的腺苷激活肾内感受器有关.     

猫颈动脉区压力和化学感受性刺激对孤束核自发放电的影响

对27只氯醛糖和氨基甲酸乙酯麻醉的猫观察了选择性激活颈动脉压力和化学感受器对孤束核(NTS)及其附近区域单位放电的影响。共记录到103个对颈动脉压力感受器激活(新福林1—2μg/kg,iv)和/或颈动脉化学感受器激活(尼古丁,5—20μg,注入甲状腺动脉)起反应的单位,其中81个位于NTS,在这些单位中,14个仅对化学感受器激活起反应(10个兴奋和4个抑制),44个以各种组合形式对化学和压力感受性刺激都起反应,23个仅对压力感受器刺激起反应(18个兴奋和5个抑制)。在定位分布上,对两种刺激都起反应的单位主要位于NTS尾部,仅对化学感受性刺激起反应的单位多位于NTS的腹外侧,其它有反应的单位分别位于舌下神经旁区,旁正中网状核和延髓腹侧尾端。这些结果表明,颈动脉区压力和化学感受器活动传入到NTS,并在其中的一些神经元上发生会聚。 在全部有反应的NTS单位中,68个对压力感受性刺激起反应,其中46个兴奋,21个抑制(P<0.005);58个对化学感受性刺激起反应,其中36个兴奋,22个抑制(P>0.05)。这些结果提示,化学感受性刺激对NTS神经元引起兴奋和抑制两种反应,而压力感受性刺激则诱发兴奋为主的反应。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor