Antilytic Secretion 1 1 5 



before the cross-circulation showed that the gland of this cat had 

 been highly sensitized by the denervation. Similar injections into 

 the same animal, during cross-circulation, disclosed that the gland 

 of the morphine cat happened to be less sensitized by the denerva- 

 tion. When the suprarenals of the morphine cat were removed 

 during cross-circulation, the paralytic secretion stopped in the 

 gland of the chloralose cat. From such an experiment it can be 

 inferred that no paralytic secretion is obtained in chloralose anaes- 

 thesia, even if the gland is highly sensitized; that secretion is 

 obtained in morphine anaesthesia; that the paralytic flow is due to 

 some blood-carried agent, derived from the suprarenals, and that 

 the rate of flow depends on the level of sensitivity. 



Antilytic secretion. During his investigations on paralytic secre- 

 tion Heidenhain (1868) observed a flow of saliva from the normally 

 innervated submaxillary gland, contralateral to the "paralytic" 

 gland, a phenomenon which he considered "altogether inexplic- 

 able". It was slower than the paralytic secretion. Langley (1885a 

 and b) observed such a flow also and coined the term antiparalytic 

 or antilytic secretion. 



It may be tempting to try to find an explanation for this pheno- 

 menon similar to that given above for the paralytic secretion. Both 

 Heidenhain and Langley used morphine anaesthesia in their ex- 

 periments, and consequently the concentration in the blood of the 

 hormones of the suprarenal medulla was high. The sensitivity of 

 normal glands to adrenaline shows very great individual variations, 

 as does that of a denervated gland; it might be that an exceptionally 

 sensitive normal gland can be excited by the adrenaline of the 

 blood in morphine anaesthesia. Apart from that, the following 

 explanation may be suggested (Emmelin, 1956). Unilateral section 

 of the afferent fibres from the tongue causes a supersensitivity in 

 both the submaxillary glands, probably by reducing the secretory 

 impulses to the gland. Heidenhain denervated the gland by cut- 

 ting the chorda-lingual nerve; important afferent fibres from the 

 tongue were thus cut beside the secretory fibres, and a certain 

 degree of supersensitivity can be supposed to have ensued in the 

 contralateral gland. This could explain his antilytic secretion, 

 smaller than the paralytic flow because the supersensitivity was not 

 so pronounced as after section of the chorda. 



Langley, however, did not cut the chorda-lingual nerve but the 

 chorda. His "antilytic" glands were therefore not sensitized by 



