Neurotransmitters Which Don't Produce Action Potentials

[annasmith]

When a neurotransmitter binds to a postsynaptic receptor, but either isn't a strong enough EPSP or is canceled out by an IPSP it won't create an action potential. What is the point of these neurotransmitters if they do not accomplish the action potential?

Thanks!

•  

[exchemist]

 

When a neurotransmitter binds to a postsynaptic receptor, but either isn't a strong enough EPSP or is canceled out by an IPSP it won't create an action potential. What is the point of these neurotransmitters if they do not accomplish the action potential?

 

Thanks!

•  

 

Can you provide some context to this question please? 

[Vmedvil]

 

When a neurotransmitter binds to a postsynaptic receptor, but either isn't a strong enough EPSP or is canceled out by an IPSP it won't create an action potential. What is the point of these neurotransmitters if they do not accomplish the action potential?

 

Thanks!

•  

 

 

You treat the brain as if it calculates every little detail like a electronic computer no matter how insignificant, well, the brain doesn't work like that when levels get high enough in concentration the neurons will fire, the neurotransmitter was a result of some environmental change or the effect something is having on the body. The human body does not see small changes as a "Big Deal" when the change becomes a high concentration then the cell will "Care" enough to alert the rest of the body, or in this case, brain by firing. It is just like different degrees of pain, you hardly notice a small amount of damage, but when lets say you get stung by a bee or lose a finger, it hurts alot more, which is a larger change you notice a great deal, neurons are no different the bigger the change or amount of neurotransmitter the greater attention the neuron pays to the change. Sometimes, it just isn't enough to cause a response by not hitting the neuron's threshold to fire.

 

 

 

This is general Answer, do not exactly know what you are asking about but that is the general answer to why. The human body is a natural Machine not a man made machine, nature had a different set of needs then mankind did when designing and creating machines, thus a different amount of detail they take to stimulus. The Organic Computer the brain is no different, it never needed the ability to notice every minor change in stimulus unlike man made electronic computers that were used for calculations where every component mattered no matter how small, originally, that was not simply the case for most of the brain's evolution or "design process". 

 

If that where the case all Organic life would be evolved with a Eidetic memory like a Electronic computer as a very prominent trait but we find it is actually quite rare not really needed for survival in nature. Remembering or reacting to every small detail despite the usefulness of the information. The Memory and reaction to stimulus is selective by amount of change or effect, the human brain, for instance, usually goes for moving details first before not moving because movement was much more dangerous in nature being a bigger change normally needing a response to.

 

 

 

So, to answer your question the neurotransmitter was created as the response to something, but just isn't strong enough in amount to create a response in the brain cell or pass the threshold of activation not being "Important" enough, but like Exchemist said..... More Context please!

Edited February 11, 2018 by Vmedvil