Inhibition of neuronal nicotinic receptors can be regulated by sequence in the  subunit second transmembrane domain (TM2). The incorporation of a 4(6ЈF10ЈT) subunit, which contains sequence from the muscle  subunit at the TM2 6Ј and 10Ј positions of the neuronal 4 subunit, increases the loss of receptor responsiveness after the application of acetylcholine (ACh), nicotine, or 3-(2,4-dimethoxybenzylidene)-anabaseine (DMXB), an ␣7-selective partial agonist. Inhibition of receptor responsiveness following agonist exposure may occur through either an enhancement of desensitization, increased channel block by an agonist, or alternatively via allosteric modulation. Although DMXB produces very little activation of either ␣34 or ␣34(6ЈF10ЈT) receptors, DMXB shows an enhanced use-and voltage-dependent inhibition of ␣34(6ЈF10ЈT) receptors compared with wild-type. In contrast, the ␣42-selective agonist (E)-N-methyl-4-(3-pyridinyl)-3-butene-1-amine (TC-2403, previously identified as RJR-2403) shows increased activation of ␣34(6ЈF10ЈT) receptors compared with ␣34 receptors (as related to ACh activation) but with no significant increase in antagonist activity. The interaction between the binding of local anesthetics and the functional inhibition produced by these agonists was evaluated. The binding of the local anesthetics to their inhibitory sites does not affect inhibitory effects of DMXB and nicotine. However, TC-2403 can protect receptor function from the inhibitory effects of other agonists, suggesting that TC-2403, as well as agonists that cause inhibition, may be binding to an allosteric site, either promoting or inhibiting channel opening. The ability of TC-2403 to protect receptor function from agonist-induced inhibition may point toward valuable new combination drug therapies.Our current understanding of the function of the ligandgated ion channels that mediate synaptic function is founded on early studies of the nicotinic receptor of the neuromuscular junction. However, the analysis of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor function is complicated by the fact that, in addition to activating receptors, exposure to agonists ultimately decreases receptor responsiveness. The classical concept of desensitization, originally put forth by Katz and Thesleff (1957), is that it represents conversion of the receptor to an alternative nonfunctional conformational state and that this conversion is promoted by the binding of agonist to the same sites that produce channel activation.Although it is clear that after an episode of strong activation, receptor responsiveness will decline in the continued presence of an agonist, producing a decrease in function that can persist after the agonist is removed, it is difficult to distinguish classical (i.e., Katz and Thesleff) desensitization from other processes, such as channel block by agonist or allosteric modulation, which might also lead to a decrease in receptor responsiveness. Moreover, the degree to which receptor responsiveness is decreased subsequent to agonist-evoke...