Differential conduction and CGRP release in visceral versus cutaneous peripheral nerves in the mouse

Cutaneous afferent nerves convey sensory information from the external, visceral nerves from the internal environment. The saphenous nerve arising from lumbar dorsal root ganglia and the vagus nerve originating in the nodosum ganglia are prototypic examples of such cutaneous and visceral nerves. Despite a common sensory role, these two nerves have distinct embryonic origin and vary in neuropeptide expression. Because of their distinct physiological roles, it is plausible that they differ also in conductive properties. We have tested calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) release in these nerves in response to electrical and chemical stimulation. Electrical stimulation at 3, 6, and 9 Hz increased the release in saphenous but not vagus nerves, with 6 Hz being the most potent stimulus. Similarly, both capsaicin and a depolarizing solution of 60 mM KCl evoked CGRP release in saphenous but not vagus nerves. Simultaneous recording of the superimposed (compound) action potentials of these nerves revealed that only saphenous nerves exhibit a progressive and marked activity‐dependent slowing of conduction velocity in response to electrical stimulation at 3, 6, and 9 Hz (30%, 44%, and 50%, respectively). Capsaicin caused an unexpected decrease in conduction latency (i.e., speeding) in contrast to the slowing seen in other nerves. Exposure of axons to 1 µM TTX rapidly blocked conduction in all nerves. Together our results demonstrate that vagus and saphenous primary afferents reveal different activation and conductive properties, presumably correlating their particular physiological roles in transmitting sensory signals. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. In the periphery, visceral nerves differ cutaneous ones in anatomy and physiology. We have compared the widely used methods of neuropeptide release (A) and conduction velocity changes (B) as representatives of neuronal activation to assess the differences between such nerves as well as common underlying mechanisms for both phenomena. We found an indirect correlation between these two measures and profound variance of them between the different nerve groups.