Comprehensive Physiology Wiley Online Library
For Librarians For Authors Editors About

Afferent Inputs to Breathing: Respiratory Sensation

Fred W. Zechman, Ronald L. Wiley

10.1002/cphy.cp030214

Source: Supplement 11: Handbook of Physiology, The Respiratory System, Control of Breathing

Originally published: 1986

Published online: January 2011

Full Article on Wiley Online Library



Abstract

The sections in this article are:

1 Methods used to Quantify Respiratory Sensations
1.1 Threshold Measurements
1.2 Scaling Methods
1.3 Apparatus for Adding Resistive and Elastic Loads
2 Perception of Volume, Ventilation, Frequency, and Pressure
2.1 Thresholds for Detection
2.2 Scaling Performance
2.3 Volume‐Matching Studies
3 Perception of Added Resistive and Elastic Loads
3.1 Load‐Detection Thresholds
3.2 Scaling of Added Loads to Breathing
4 Ability to Discriminate Between Added Resistive and Elastic Loads
5 Effects of Aging on Respiratory Sensation
5.1 Perception of Volume and Pressure
5.2 Perception of Added Loads
6 Perception in Patients with Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
6.1 Load Detection (Difference‐Threshold Measurements)
6.2 Scaling of Added Loads
7 Potential Sites for Receptors Subserving Load and Volume Perception
7.1 Upper (Extrathoracic) Airways
7.2 Lungs
7.3 Chest Wall
7.4 Diaphragm
8 Proposed Mechanisms of Perception
8.1 Evidence Supporting Primary Role of Muscle Afferents
8.2 Apparent Contributions of Motor Command
9 Interplay Between Perceptual Performance and Ventilatory Control
10 Summary
Figure 1. Figure 1.

Psychophysical magnitude functions for 3 perceptual continua. Linearity of functions on double logarithmic coordinates indicates that sensation magnitude is a power function of stimulus intensity; slope of line corresponds to exponent of power function. Exponents for electric shock to fingertips, line length, and brightness of relatively large stimuli lasting ∼1 s are 3.5, 1.0, and 0.33, respectively.

From Gescheider 23
Figure 2. Figure 2.

Psychophysical magnitude functions for 3 perceptual continua plotted on linear coordinates. Each is a power function, and its form is greatly influenced by size of exponent. Exponent of 1.0 corresponds to linear function, <1.0 corresponds to concave downward function, and >1.0 corresponds to concave upward function.

From Gescheider 23
Figure 3. Figure 3.

Resistance and elastance circuits.

From Killian et al. 33
Figure 4. Figure 4.

Pressure estimates for all subjects. Each experiment is separately illustrated by fine line connecting data points (not shown). Heavy line is median curve.

From Bakers and Tenney 4
Figure 5. Figure 5.

Relation between control tidal volumes and test tidal volumes during attempts at tidal‐volume duplication. A: control and test breaths are made freely with no added load (•), against resistive load (×), or against elastic load (□). B: no added load during control breaths; test breaths are made against resistive load or against elastic load.

From Wolkove et al. 55
Figure 6. Figure 6.

Relation between intrathoracic pressure changes from end expiration to end inspiration of control and test breaths during attempts at tidal‐volume doubling. A: control and test breaths are made freely. B: unloaded control breaths are followed by test breaths. C: unloaded test breaths follow control breaths. With no added load (•), against resistive load (×) or elastic load (□).

From Wolkove et al. 55
Figure 7. Figure 7.

Mean absolute error for planned and constrained inspirations for 25%, 50%, and 75% of inspiratory capacity.

From Gliner et al. 24
Figure 8. Figure 8.

Mean constant errors for planned and constrained inspirations for 25%, 50%, and 75% of inspiratory capacity.

From Gliner et al. 24
Figure 9. Figure 9.

Mean just‐noticeable differences (JNDs) for planned and constrained inspirations for 25%, 50%, and 75% of inspiratory capacity.

From Gliner et al. 24
Figure 10. Figure 10.

A: mean detection scores for 8 levels of added resistance in 5 subjects while seated and supine (5° head‐down tilt position). Levels of resistance are plotted as increases in resistance (ΔR); SE is shown for each mean score. B: mean detection scores for proportional change of resistance in 5 subjects while seated and supine. Proportional change ΔR/Rt is increase in resistance divided by total initial resistance.

From Wiley and Zechman 53
Figure 11. Figure 11.

Mean detection of added inspiratory flow resistance for 3 levels of elastic loads in 5 subjects. Bars, ±1 SD; ordinate, detection‐probability scores (P); abscissa, log flow‐resistive loads expressed as fraction of basal flow resistance (ΔR/R0). ○, Unloaded; □, 0.15 cmH2O/liter; Δ, 0.25 cmH2O/liter; ∇, 0.50 cmH2O/liter.

From Shahid et al. 45
Figure 12. Figure 12.

Mean detection of added inspiratory flow resistance for 3 levels of added elastic loads in 5 subjects. Bars, ±1 SD; ordinate, detection‐probability scores (P); abscissa, log added flow‐resistive load as fraction of sum of added elastic load and basal flow resistance (ΔR/R + Ea). ○, Unloaded; □, 0.15 cmH2O/liter; Δ, 0.25 cmH2O/liter; ∇, 0.50 cmH2O/liter.

From Shahid et al. 45
Figure 13. Figure 13.

Detection probability for group (means ± SE) plotted against added resistance. •, Active ventilation; ○, passive ventilation.

From Killian et al. 32
Figure 14. Figure 14.

Individual exponents for resistance and elastance with SD. θ, Stimulus intensity.

From Killian et al. 33
Figure 15. Figure 15.

Perceived magnitude of added elastic and resistive loads (group means).

From Killian et al. 33
Figure 16. Figure 16.

Group mean estimates plotted as function of peak inspiratory pressure for resistive, elastic, and mixed loads. Ψ, Sensation magnitude; ϕ, stimulus intensity.

From Killian et al. 30
Figure 17. Figure 17.

Temporal patterns of load sensation expressed by handgrip tension in response to added inspiratory resistive (ΔR) and elastic (ΔE) loads. Vi, inspiratory airflow; Pm, mouth pressure; Vi, inspiratory volume.

From Zechman et al. 62
Figure 18. Figure 18.

Log‐log plot of group data of magnitude estimation of elastic loads. Bars indicate SE. Slope of line for younger group is 0.75 and for older group is 0.49. Difference in slopes is statistically significant (P < 0.01).

From Tack et al. 50
Figure 19. Figure 19.

Effect of curarization on a subject's ability to estimate magnitude of added inspiratory resistive loads. Left, mean ± SE of 10 estimates of each resistance plotted against added resistance during control run (○) and during partial neuromuscular block (•). At all levels of resistance load, perceived magnitude during curarization exceeded control magnitude. Right, same data plotted on a logarithmic scale for both resistance and perceived magnitude. Means only are plotted for control run and during curarization. Slope of linear regression was 0.80 for control run and 0.39 during partial curarization. Slope or exponent in Stevens' psychophysical law was significantly reduced during curarization.

From Campbell et al. 13
Figure 20. Figure 20.

Relation between individual responses to CO2 (SPm0.1, SVe) and ability to detect added inspiratory resistive loads (ΔR/Rt). e, ventilatory responses; Pm0.1, mouth pressure at 0.1 s.

From Zechman and Burki 56
Figure 21. Figure 21.

Relation between measures of perception of airflow resistance and compensatory change in respiratory activity during resistive loading. Ordinate shows ratio of occlusion‐pressure response (Pm0.1) to increase in CO2 during ventilatory loading expressed as percentage of response during free rebreathing (ΔPm0.1/ΔPco2). Left: just‐noticeable difference (JND) in airflow resistance expressed as percentage of base‐line resistance. Right: exponent for magnitude estimation (ME) of airflow resistance. •, Normal subjects; ○, asthmatics; ×, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Pm0.1, mouth pressure at 0.1 s.

From Gottfried et al. 26


Figure 1.

Psychophysical magnitude functions for 3 perceptual continua. Linearity of functions on double logarithmic coordinates indicates that sensation magnitude is a power function of stimulus intensity; slope of line corresponds to exponent of power function. Exponents for electric shock to fingertips, line length, and brightness of relatively large stimuli lasting ∼1 s are 3.5, 1.0, and 0.33, respectively.

From Gescheider 23


Figure 2.

Psychophysical magnitude functions for 3 perceptual continua plotted on linear coordinates. Each is a power function, and its form is greatly influenced by size of exponent. Exponent of 1.0 corresponds to linear function, <1.0 corresponds to concave downward function, and >1.0 corresponds to concave upward function.

From Gescheider 23


Figure 3.

Resistance and elastance circuits.

From Killian et al. 33


Figure 4.

Pressure estimates for all subjects. Each experiment is separately illustrated by fine line connecting data points (not shown). Heavy line is median curve.

From Bakers and Tenney 4


Figure 5.

Relation between control tidal volumes and test tidal volumes during attempts at tidal‐volume duplication. A: control and test breaths are made freely with no added load (•), against resistive load (×), or against elastic load (□). B: no added load during control breaths; test breaths are made against resistive load or against elastic load.

From Wolkove et al. 55


Figure 6.

Relation between intrathoracic pressure changes from end expiration to end inspiration of control and test breaths during attempts at tidal‐volume doubling. A: control and test breaths are made freely. B: unloaded control breaths are followed by test breaths. C: unloaded test breaths follow control breaths. With no added load (•), against resistive load (×) or elastic load (□).

From Wolkove et al. 55


Figure 7.

Mean absolute error for planned and constrained inspirations for 25%, 50%, and 75% of inspiratory capacity.

From Gliner et al. 24


Figure 8.

Mean constant errors for planned and constrained inspirations for 25%, 50%, and 75% of inspiratory capacity.

From Gliner et al. 24


Figure 9.

Mean just‐noticeable differences (JNDs) for planned and constrained inspirations for 25%, 50%, and 75% of inspiratory capacity.

From Gliner et al. 24


Figure 10.

A: mean detection scores for 8 levels of added resistance in 5 subjects while seated and supine (5° head‐down tilt position). Levels of resistance are plotted as increases in resistance (ΔR); SE is shown for each mean score. B: mean detection scores for proportional change of resistance in 5 subjects while seated and supine. Proportional change ΔR/Rt is increase in resistance divided by total initial resistance.

From Wiley and Zechman 53


Figure 11.

Mean detection of added inspiratory flow resistance for 3 levels of elastic loads in 5 subjects. Bars, ±1 SD; ordinate, detection‐probability scores (P); abscissa, log flow‐resistive loads expressed as fraction of basal flow resistance (ΔR/R0). ○, Unloaded; □, 0.15 cmH2O/liter; Δ, 0.25 cmH2O/liter; ∇, 0.50 cmH2O/liter.

From Shahid et al. 45


Figure 12.

Mean detection of added inspiratory flow resistance for 3 levels of added elastic loads in 5 subjects. Bars, ±1 SD; ordinate, detection‐probability scores (P); abscissa, log added flow‐resistive load as fraction of sum of added elastic load and basal flow resistance (ΔR/R + Ea). ○, Unloaded; □, 0.15 cmH2O/liter; Δ, 0.25 cmH2O/liter; ∇, 0.50 cmH2O/liter.

From Shahid et al. 45


Figure 13.

Detection probability for group (means ± SE) plotted against added resistance. •, Active ventilation; ○, passive ventilation.

From Killian et al. 32


Figure 14.

Individual exponents for resistance and elastance with SD. θ, Stimulus intensity.

From Killian et al. 33


Figure 15.

Perceived magnitude of added elastic and resistive loads (group means).

From Killian et al. 33


Figure 16.

Group mean estimates plotted as function of peak inspiratory pressure for resistive, elastic, and mixed loads. Ψ, Sensation magnitude; ϕ, stimulus intensity.

From Killian et al. 30


Figure 17.

Temporal patterns of load sensation expressed by handgrip tension in response to added inspiratory resistive (ΔR) and elastic (ΔE) loads. Vi, inspiratory airflow; Pm, mouth pressure; Vi, inspiratory volume.

From Zechman et al. 62


Figure 18.

Log‐log plot of group data of magnitude estimation of elastic loads. Bars indicate SE. Slope of line for younger group is 0.75 and for older group is 0.49. Difference in slopes is statistically significant (P < 0.01).

From Tack et al. 50


Figure 19.

Effect of curarization on a subject's ability to estimate magnitude of added inspiratory resistive loads. Left, mean ± SE of 10 estimates of each resistance plotted against added resistance during control run (○) and during partial neuromuscular block (•). At all levels of resistance load, perceived magnitude during curarization exceeded control magnitude. Right, same data plotted on a logarithmic scale for both resistance and perceived magnitude. Means only are plotted for control run and during curarization. Slope of linear regression was 0.80 for control run and 0.39 during partial curarization. Slope or exponent in Stevens' psychophysical law was significantly reduced during curarization.

From Campbell et al. 13


Figure 20.

Relation between individual responses to CO2 (SPm0.1, SVe) and ability to detect added inspiratory resistive loads (ΔR/Rt). e, ventilatory responses; Pm0.1, mouth pressure at 0.1 s.

From Zechman and Burki 56


Figure 21.

Relation between measures of perception of airflow resistance and compensatory change in respiratory activity during resistive loading. Ordinate shows ratio of occlusion‐pressure response (Pm0.1) to increase in CO2 during ventilatory loading expressed as percentage of response during free rebreathing (ΔPm0.1/ΔPco2). Left: just‐noticeable difference (JND) in airflow resistance expressed as percentage of base‐line resistance. Right: exponent for magnitude estimation (ME) of airflow resistance. •, Normal subjects; ○, asthmatics; ×, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Pm0.1, mouth pressure at 0.1 s.

From Gottfried et al. 26
References
 1. Agostoni, E. Diaphragm activity during breath holding: factors related to its onset. J. Appl. Physiol. 18: 30–36, 1963.
 2. Altose, M. D., and N. S. Cherniack. Respiratory muscle activity and respiratory sensation (Abstract). In: Proc. Int. Congr. Physiol. Sci., 28th, Budapest, 1980, vol. 14, p. 50.
 3. Altose, M. D., P. G. Kondapalli, and W. Zaccardelli. The perception of changes in tidal volume and its relationship to hypercapnic responses (Abstract). Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 119: 286, 1979.
 4. Bakers, J. H. C. M., and S. M. Tenney. The perception of some sensations associated with breathing. Respir. Physiol. 10: 85–92, 1970.
 5. Benchetrit, G. A., and F. Bertrand. A short‐term memory in the respiratory centres: statistical analysis. Respir. Physiol. 23: 147–158, 1975.
 6. Bennett, E. D., M. I. V. Jayson, D. Rubenstein, and E. J. M. Campbell. The ability of man to detect added non‐elastic loads to breathing. Clin. Sci. 23: 155–162, 1962.
 7. Burdon, J. G. W., K. J. Killian, and E. J. M. Campbell. Reaction time to added inspiratory loads (Abstract). Federation Proc. 40: 386, 1981.
 8. Burki, N. K. Effects of added inspiratory loads on load detection thresholds. J. Appl. Physiol.: Respirat. Environ. Exercise Physiol. 50: 162–164, 1981.
 9. Burki, N. K. Effects of bronchodilation on magnitude estimation of added resistive loads in asthmatic subjects (Abstract). Federation Proc. 40: 623, 1981.
 10. Burki, N. K., P. W. Davenport, F. Safdar, and F. W. Zechman. The effects of airway anesthesia on magnitude estimation of added inspiratory resistive and elastic loads. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 127: 2–4, 1983.
 11. Burki, N. K., K. Mitchell, B. A. Chaudhary, and F. W. Zechman. The ability of asthmatics to detect added resistive loads. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 117: 71–75, 1978.
 12. Campbell, E. J. M., S. Freedman, P. S. Smith, and M. E. Taylor. The ability of man to detect added elastic loads to breathing. Clin. Sci. 20: 223–231, 1961.
 13. Campbell, E. J. M., S. C. Gandevia, K. J. Killian, C. K. Mahutte, and J. R. A. Rigg. Changes in the perception of inspiratory resistive loads during partial curarization. J. Physiol. London 309: 93–100, 1980.
 14. Chaudhary, B. A., and N. K. Burki. The effects of airway anesthesia on the ability to detect added inspiratory resistive loads. Clin. Sci. Mol. Med. 54: 621–626, 1978.
 15. Chaudhary, B. A., and N. K. Burki. The effects of airway anesthesia on detection of added inspiratory elastic loads. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 122: 635–639, 1980.
 16. d'Amato, M.R. Experimental Psychology: Methodology, Psychophysics and Learning. New York: McGraw‐Hill, 1970.
 17. Eisele, J., D. Trenchard, N. Burki, and A. Guz. The effect of chest wall block on respiratory sensations and control in man. Clin. Sci. 35: 23–33, 1968.
 18. Gamberale, F., I. Holmér, A. S. Kindblom, and A. Nordström. Magnitude perception of added inspiratory resistance during steady‐state exercise. Ergonomics 21: 531–538, 1978.
 19. Gandevia, S. C., K. J. Killian, and E. J. M. Campbell. The apparent involvement of a “sense of effort” in sensing the size of respiratory loads (Abstract). Proc. Aust. Physiol. Pharmacol. Soc. 11: 106, 1980.
 20. Gandevia, S. C., K. J. Killian, and E. J. M. Campbell. The contribution of upper airway and inspiratory muscle mechanisms to the detection of pressure changes at the mouth in normal subjects. Clin. Sci. 60: 513–518, 1981.
 21. Gandevia, S. C., K. J. Killian, and E. J. M. Campbell. The effect of respiratory muscle fatigue on respiratory sensations. Clin. Sci. 60: 463–466, 1981.
 22. Gandevia, S. C., and D. I. McCloskey. Joint sense, muscle sense, and their combination as position sense, measured at the distal interphalangeal joint of the middle finger. J. Physiol. London 260: 387–407, 1976.
 23. Gescheider, G. A. Psychophysics: Method and Theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1976.
 24. Gliner, J. A., L. J. Folinsbee, and S. M. Horvath. Accuracy and precision of matching inspired lung volume. Percept. Psychophys. 29: 511–515, 1981.
 25. Goodwin, G. M., D. I. McCloskey, and P. B. C. Matthews. The contribution of muscle afferents to kinaesthesia shown by vibration induced illusions of movement and by the effects of paralysing joint afferents. Brain 95: 705–748, 1972.
 26. Gottfried, S. B., M. D. Altose, S. G. Kelsen, and N. S. Cherniack. Perception of changes in airflow resistance in obstructive pulmonary disorders. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 124: 566–570, 1981.
 27. Gottfried, S. B., M. D. Altose, S. G. Kelsen, C. M. Fogarty, and N. S. Cherniack. The perception of changes in airflow resistance in normal subjects and patients with chronic airways obstruction. Chest 73: 286–288, 1978.
 28. Guz, A., M. I. M. Noble, J. G. Widdicombe, D. Trenchard, W. W. Mushin, and A. R. Makey. The role of vagal and glossopharyngeal afferent nerves in respiratory sensation, control of breathing, and arterial pressure regulation in conscious man. Clin. Sci. 30: 161–170, 1966.
 29. Howell, J. B. L. Effects and associations of disturbed airways resistance and ventilatory control. In: Loaded Breathing: Proceedings of an International Symposium on “The Effects of Mechanical Loads on Breathing”, edited by L. D. Pengelly, A. S. Rebuck, and E. J. M. Campbell. New York: Longman, 1974, p. 1–9.
 30. Killian, K. J., D. D. Bucens, and E. J. M. Campbell. Effect of breathing patterns on the perceived magnitude of added loads to breathing. J. Appl. Physiol.: Respirat. Environ. Exercise Physiol. 52: 578–584, 1982.
 31. Killian, K. J., E. J. M. Campbell, and J. B. L. Howell. The effect of increased ventilation on resistive load discrimination. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 120: 1233–1238, 1979.
 32. Killian, K. J., C. K. Mahutte, and E. J. M. Campbell. Resistive load detection during passive ventilation. Clin. Sci. 59: 493–495, 1980.
 33. Killian, K. J., C. K. Mahutte, and E. J. M. Campbell. Magnitude scaling of externally added loads to breathing. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 123: 12–15, 1981.
 34. Killian, K. J., C. K. Mahutte, J. B. L. Howell, and E. J. M. Campbell. Effect of timing, flow, lung volume, and threshold pressures on resistive load detection. J. Appl. Physiol.: Respirat. Environ. Exercise Physiol. 49: 958–963, 1980.
 35. Leech, I., M. D. Altose, and W. Zaccardelli. Ventilatory load perception following cervical spinal cord injury (Abstract). Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 121, Suppl.: 372, 1980.
 36. Matthews, P. B. C. Muscle afferents and kinaesthesia. Br. Med. Bull. 33: 137–142, 1977.
 37. McCloskey, D. I. Kinesthetic sensibility. Physiol. Rev. 58: 763–820, 1978.
 38. McCloskey, D. I., P. Ebeling, and G. M. Goodwin. Estimation of weights and tensions and apparent involvement of a “sense of effort.” Exp. Neurol. 42: 220–232, 1974.
 39. Newsom Davis, J. Contribution of somatic receptors in the chest wall to detection of added inspiratory airway resistance. Clin. Sci. 33: 249–260, 1967.
 40. Noble, M. I. M., J. H. Eisele, D. Trenchard, and A. Guz. Effect of selective peripheral nerve blocks on respiratory sensations. In: Breathing: Hering‐Breuer Centenary Symposium, edited by R. Porter. London: Churchill, 1970, p. 233–246. (Ciba Found. Symp.).
 41. Noble, M. I. M., H. L. Frankel, W. Else, and A. Guz. The ability of man to detect added resistive loads to breathing. Clin. Sci. 41: 285–287, 1971.
 42. Noble, M. I. M., H. L. Frankel, W. Else, and A. Guz. The sensation produced by threshold resistive loads to breathing. Eur. J. Clin. Invest. 2: 72–77, 1972.
 43. Roland, P. E., and H. Ladegaard‐Pedersen. A quantitative analysis of sensations of tension and kinaesthesia in man. Evidence for a peripherally originating muscular sense and for a sense of effort. Brain 100: 671–692, 1977.
 44. Shahid, S. U., B. A. Goddard, and J. B. L. Howell. The detection and interaction of added respiratory loads in normal man (Abstract). Clin. Sci. Mol. Med. 49: 9P, 1975.
 45. Shahid, S. U., B. A. Goddard, and J. B. L. Howell. Detection and interaction of elastic and flow‐resistive respiratory loads in man. Clin. Sci. 61: 339–343, 1981.
 46. Stevens, J. C., and W. S. Cain. Effort in isometric muscular contractions related to force level and duration. Percept. Psychophys. 8: 240–244, 1970.
 47. Stevens, S. S. On the psychophysical law. Psychol. Rev. 64: 153–181, 1957.
 48. Stubbing, D. G., K. J. Killian, and E. J. M. Campbell. Does resistive load detection obey Weber's law over a wide range of background resistances (Abstract)? Federation Proc. 40: 386, 1981.
 49. Stubbing, D. G., K. J. Killian, and E. J. M. Campbell. The quantification of respiratory sensations by normal subjects. Respir. Physiol. 44: 251–260, 1981.
 50. Tack, M., M. D. Altose, and N. S. Cherniack. Effect of aging on respiratory sensations produced by elastic loads. J. Appl. Physiol.: Respirat. Environ. Exercise Physiol. 50: 844–850, 1981.
 51. Tack, M., S. Rubin, N. S. Cherniack, and M. D. Altose. Aging effects on perception of tidal volume and mouth pressure changes (Abstract). Federation Proc. 40: 622, 1981.
 52. West, D. W. M., C. G. Ellis, and E. J. M. Campbell. Ability of man to detect increases in his breathing. J. Appl. Physiol. 39: 372–376, 1975.
 53. Wiley, R. L., and F. W. Zechman. Perception of added airflow resistance in humans. Respir. Physiol. 2: 73–87, 1966.
 54. Wolkove, N., M. D. Altose, S. G. Kelsen, and N. S. Cherniack. Respiratory control abnormalities in alveolar hypoventilation. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 122: 163–167, 1980.
 55. Wolkove, N., M. D. Altose, S. G. Kelsen, P. G. Kondapalli, and N. S. Cherniack. Perception of changes in breathing in normal human subjects. J. Appl. Physiol.: Respirat. Environ. Exercise Physiol. 50: 78–83, 1981.
 56. Zechman, F. W., and N. K. Burki. Tracking procedure to assess load detection threshold. Chest 70: 165–168, 1976.
 57. Zechman, F. W., and P. W. Davenport. The effect of increased background airflow resistance on ventilatory control and the threshold for detection of added resistance (Abstract). Physiologist 21 (4): 132, 1978.
 58. Zechman, F. W., and P. W. Davenport. Temporal differences in the detection of resistive and elastic loads to breathing. Respir. Physiol. 34: 267–277, 1978.
 59. Zechman, F. W., P. W. Davenport, R. L. Wiley, and R. Shelton. Relationship of transdiaphragmatic pressure (Pdi) and detection of inspiratory elastic (E) loads (Abstract). Federation Proc. 40: 453, 1981.
 60. Zechman, F. W., R. O'Neill, and R. Shannon. Effect of low cervical spinal cord lesions on detection of increased airflow resistance in man (Abstract). Physiologist 10: 356, 1967.
 61. Zechman, F. W., and R. L. Wiley. Effect of chest cage restriction on perception of added airflow resistance. Respir. Physiol. 31: 71–79, 1977.
 62. Zechman, F. W., R. L. Wiley, and P. W. Davenport. Ability of healthy men to discriminate between added inspiratory resistive and elastic loads. Respir. Physiol. 45: 111–120, 1981.
 63. Zechman, F. W., R. L. Wiley, P. W. Davenport, and N. K. Burki. Load detection latencies and temporal patterns of added load sensation. Am. Rev. Respir. Dis. 119: 73–75, 1979.

Contact Editor

Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

Article Title: Afferent Inputs to Breathing: Respiratory Sensation
 

How to Cite

Fred W. Zechman, Ronald L. Wiley. Afferent Inputs to Breathing: Respiratory Sensation. Compr Physiol 2011, Supplement 11: Handbook of Physiology, The Respiratory System, Control of Breathing: 449-474. First published in print 1986. doi: 10.1002/cphy.cp030214