REFLEX INHIBITION OF SKELETAL MUSCLE

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
1. There appears to be no foundation for the view accepted by some that inhibition results from stimulation of assimilation in excitable tissues.2. The dynamic features of the crossed extension reflex and its inhibition in the preparation used by Sherrington cannot be explained in full under all conditions in terms of assimilation and dissimilation in the moto‐neurones as discussed by Hering.3. There are several reasons for believing that the increased response to a given excitatory stimulus following prolonged inhibition and the “rebound contraction” following brief inhibition are essentially different phenomena.4. Inhibition when opposing excitation in this preparation does not delay fatigue in the excitatory arc.5. The effect of prolonged inhibition upon subsequent excitation depends on the strength of the inhibitory stimulus. With moderate stimuli it favours subsequent activity, with strong stimuli it depresses it.Exceptional cases are found, probably always after impairment of ventilation, in which every strength of prolonged inhibition causes subsequent depression of excitatory response.6. The “critical value” of inhibition at which it neither improves nor impairs subsequent excitatory activity appears to be lowered if the excitatory arc is stimulated during the prolonged inhibition.7. Prolonged inhibition fatigues some part of the inhibitory reflex arc, and impairs its subsequent response.8. There is evidence, to be published in detail later, showing that fatigue as demonstrated in both excitatory and inhibitory arcs does not involve the centre as a whole, but only the particular path employed.9. Possible explanations of “subsequent augmentation” and “subsequent depression” are discussed.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: