Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (35)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kaissling, K.-E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Kaissling, K.-E.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Chemical Senses 23: 99-111,
© 1998 Oxford University Press

Flux Detectors versus Concentration Detectors: Two Types of Chemoreceptors

Karl-Ernst Kaissling

Max-Planck-Institut für Verhaltensphysiologie Seewiesen D-82319 Starnberg, Germany

Correspondence to be addressed to: Dr Karl-Ernst Kaissling, apl. Prof., Max-Planck-Institut für Verhaltensphysiologie Seewiesen, Postfach 1564, D-82305 Starnberg, Germany. e-mail: Kaissling{at}mpi-seewiesen.mpg.de


   Abstract

Dose-response curves relating the external stimulus concentration to receptor occupancy differ in two types of chemoreceptor organs. In ‘concentration detectors’ the receptor molecules at the receptor cell membrane are directly exposed to the external stimulus concentration; these organs exhibit the well-known hyperbolic dose-response relationship reflecting the association-dissociation of stimulus and receptor molecules. In contrast, ‘flux detectors’ accumulate the stimulus molecules in a perireceptor compartment. In flux detectors, deactivation of stimulus molecules may be in balance with arrival, as a prerequisite for producing a constant effective stimulus concentration at constant adsorptive flux of stimulus molecules. In a simple model of a flux detector in which receptor molecules themselves catalyze the deactivation, the dose-response relationship is linear. It reflects the rate of stimulus deactivation. If the deactivation is catalyzed by a separate enzyme, the dose-response relationship can be close to hyperbolic, or linear. In all cases, the receptor molecules are maximally occupied if the adsorptive flux equals or exceeds the maximum rate of stimulus deactivation. The time course of the receptor potential recorded from moths' pheromone receptors depends on the odor compound, which suggests that a peripheral process, possibly the stimulus deactivation, is the slowest, rate-limiting process of the transduction cascade. Further evidence comes from experiments with stimuli oversaturating the mechanism responsible for the decline of the receptor potential.

Accepted 28 October 1997


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Chem SensesHome page
M. G. de Brito Sanchez and K.-E. Kaissling
Inhibitory and Excitatory Effects of Iodobenzene on the Antennal Benzoic Acid Receptor Cells of the Female Silk Moth Bombyx mori L.
Chem Senses, June 1, 2005; 30(5): 435 - 442.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Chem SensesHome page
K.-E. Kaissling and J.-P. Rospars
Dose-Response Relationships in an Olfactory Flux Detector Model Revisited
Chem Senses, July 1, 2004; 29(6): 529 - 531.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Chem SensesHome page
J.-P. Rospars, P. Lansky, and V. Krivan
Extracellular Transduction Events Under Pulsed Stimulation in Moth Olfactory Sensilla
Chem Senses, July 1, 2003; 28(6): 509 - 522.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Exp. Biol.Home page
K. S. Mead, M. B. Wiley, M. A. R. Koehl, and J. R. Koseff
Fine-scale patterns of odor encounter by the antennules of mantis shrimp tracking turbulent plumes in wave-affected and unidirectional flow
J. Exp. Biol., January 1, 2003; 206(1): 181 - 193.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Integr. Comp. Biol.Home page
K. S. Mead
From Odor Molecules to Plume Tracking: An Interdisciplinary, Multilevel Approach to Olfaction in Stomatopods
Integr. Comp. Biol., April 1, 2002; 42(2): 258 - 264.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Chem SensesHome page
W. M. Getz and P. Lansky
Receptor Dissociation Constants and the Information Entropy of Membranes Coding Ligand Concentration
Chem Senses, February 1, 2001; 26(2): 95 - 104.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Chem SensesHome page
J.-P. Rospars, V. Krivan, and P. Lansky
Perireceptor and Receptor Events in Olfaction. Comparison of Concentration and Flux Detectors: a Modeling Study
Chem Senses, June 1, 2000; 25(3): 293 - 311.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Exp. Biol.Home page
K. Mead and M. Koehl
Stomatopod antennule design: the asymmetry, sampling efficiency and ontogeny of olfactory flicking
J. Exp. Biol., January 12, 2000; 203(24): 3795 - 3808.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J. Exp. Biol.Home page
C Loudon and M. Koehl
Sniffing by a silkworm moth: wing fanning enhances air penetration through and pheromone interception by antennae
J. Exp. Biol., January 10, 2000; 203(19): 2977 - 2990.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Chem SensesHome page
W. M. Getz
A Kinetic Model of the Transient Phase in the Response of Olfactory Receptor Neurons
Chem Senses, October 1, 1999; 24(5): 497 - 508.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.