help button home button Biophys. J.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Biophysical Journal 62: 160-171 (1992)
© 1992 the Biophysical Society

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Perozo, E
Right arrow Articles by Bezanilla, F
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Perozo, E
Right arrow Articles by Bezanilla, F

Gating currents in Shaker K+ channels. Implications for activation and inactivation models.

E Perozo, D M Papazian, E Stefani and F Bezanilla

Department of Physiology, University of California, Los Angeles 90024.

ABSTRACT

We have studied ionic and gating currents in mutant and wild-type Shaker K+ channels to investigate the mechanisms of channel activation and the relationship between the voltage sensor of the channel and its inactivation particle. The turn on of the gating current shows a rising phase, indicating that the hypothetical identical activation subunits are not independent. Hyperpolarizing prepulses indicate that most of the voltage-dependence occurs in the transitions between closed states. The open-to-closed transition is voltage independent, as suggested by the presence of a rising phase in the off gating currents. In Shaker channels showing fast inactivation, the off gating charge is partially immobilized as a result of depolarizing pulses that elicit inactivation. In mutant channels lacking inactivation, the charge is recovered quickly at the end of the pulse. Internal TEA mimics the inactivation particle in its behavior but the charge immobilization is established faster and is complete. We conclude that the activation mechanism cannot be due to the movement of identical independent gating subunits, each undergoing first order transitions, and that the inactivation particle is responsible for charge immobilization in this channel.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Physiol.Home page
Z. Wang, B. Robertson, and D. Fedida
Gating currents from a Kv3 subfamily potassium channel: charge movement and modification by BDS-II toxin
J. Physiol., November 1, 2007; 584(3): 755 - 767.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Gen. Physiol.Home page
N. Savalli, A. Kondratiev, S. B. de Quintana, L. Toro, and R. Olcese
Modes of Operation of the BKCa Channel {beta}2 Subunit
J. Gen. Physiol., July 1, 2007; 130(1): 117 - 131.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Biophys. JHome page
S. Wang, V. E. Bondarenko, Y.-j. Qu, G. C. L. Bett, M. J. Morales, R. L. Rasmusson, and H. C. Strauss
Time- and Voltage-Dependent Components of Kv4.3 Inactivation
Biophys. J., November 1, 2005; 89(5): 3026 - 3041.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Gen. Physiol.Home page
A. Dahlmann, M. Li, Z. Gao, D. McGarrigle, H. Sackin, and L. G. Palmer
Regulation of Kir Channels by Intracellular pH and Extracellular K+: Mechanisms of Coupling
J. Gen. Physiol., March 29, 2004; 123(4): 441 - 454.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Biophys. JHome page
H. Sackin, A. Vasilyev, L. G. Palmer, and M. Krambis
Permeant Cations and Blockers Modulate pH Gating of ROMK Channels
Biophys. J., February 1, 2003; 84(2): 910 - 921.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1992 by the Biophysical Society.