Experimental Physiology
90.3 pp 257
© The Physiological Society 2005
Authors' response to G. B. Richerson's commentary
Patrice G. Guyenet
1
,
Ruth L. Stornetta
1
,
Douglas A. Bayliss
1
and
Daniel K. Mulkey
1
1 Department of Pharmacology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22908, USA
We have no additional substantive comment to make. Richerson et al. and ourselves continue to have a divergent interpretation of a few aspects of the literature. We have no theoretical objection against serotonergic neurons being central chemoreceptors; we merely point out that the effects of hypercapnia on serotonergic cells in vivo are not convincingly documented, a fact that can hardly be ignored. Richerson et al. propose reasonable possible explanations which need testing. Richerson et al. also express their reservations about RTN neurons being central chemoreceptors. While we agree with the list of additional experimental evidence that is needed to fully demonstrate this theory, we are also pleased to note that our colleague could not identify any experimental evidence that contradicts the hypothesis. Further experimentation will undoubtedly bring all of us in the field closer to a full understanding of central chemoreception.