Slow synaptic inhibition: evidence for synaptic inactivation of sodium conductance in sympathetic ganglion cells.
Slow synaptic inhibition: evidence for synaptic inactivation of sodium conductance in sympathetic ganglion cells.
复制标题
缓慢的突触抑制：交感神经节细胞钠电导突触失活的证据。
DOI：
10.1016/0006-8993(73)90505-2
复制
发表时间：
1973
期刊：
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Ante Padjen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Forrest F. Weight;Ante Padjen
图1.C细胞中的快EPSP和慢IPSP。A]，逆行动作电位。逆行传导速度为0.24m/s时，神经元为C细胞。刺激第III脊神经节前C纤维产生的快速EPSP。B1，在烟碱受体阻断后，以50 Hz的频率刺激第III神经节前C纤维，在同一C细胞产生慢的IPSP。刺激周期由B~记录下标有S的线条表示。B2，上记录：-0.1 nA的超极化恒流脉冲。低记录：缓慢IPSP期间的电阻变化，在刺激前桥平衡，因此电流脉冲不会产生电压偏转。注意，在缓慢的IPSP过程中，电流脉冲产生了2 mV的超极化电压偏转，表明该电池的电阻增加了20mFL。从IV曲线确定，该电池的静息输入电阻为78mFL C，这是由稳定的直流电流产生的膜极化效应。左图为去极化(+)和超极化(--)电流对慢IPSP波幅的影响。右，在同一极化电流中记录的反向棘波的幅度。D，慢速IPSP(填充圆圈)和C中反向尖峰(开环)的幅度，在图形上表示为极化电流的函数，在慢速IPSP过程中，IF增加。阻力变化的幅度似乎与慢速IPSP的幅度平行。超极化方向的电流-电压关系基本上是线性的。膜极化的影响如图1C所示。适度的超极化电流使慢的IPSP波幅增大，而中等的去极化电流使慢的IPSP波幅降低。逐渐增强的去极化电流进一步减小，然后消除缓慢的IPSP。额外的非常强烈
Fig. 1. Fast EPSP and slow IPSP in C cell. A], Antidromic action potential. Antidromic conduction velocity of 0.24 m/sec identifies neuron as C cell. An, Fast EPSP generated by stimulation of preganglionic C fibers in VIIIth spinal nerve. B1, Slow IPSP generated in same C cell, after nicotinic blockade, by stimulation of preganglionic C fibers in the VIIIth nerve at a frequency of 50 Hz. Period of stimulation indicated by line labeled S under record in B~. B2, Upper record: hyperpolarizing constant current pulses of---0.1 nA. Lower record: resistance change during slow IPSP, Bridge balanced before stimulation such that current pulses produced no voltage deflection. Note that during the slow IPSP the current pulse produced a hyperpotarizing voltage deflection of 2 mV, indicating a resistance increase of 20 MfL Resting input resistance of this cell, determined from IV curves, was 78 MfL C, Effect of membrane polarization produced by steady DC current. Left, amplitude of slow IPSP as a function of depolarizing (+) and hyperpolarizing (--) current. Right, amplitude of antidromic spike recorded during the same polarizing current. D, Amplitudes of slow IPSP (filled circles) and antidromic Spike (open circles) in C, represented graphically as a function of polarizing current, tance increased during the slow IPSP. The magnitude of the resistance change appeared to parallel the amplitude of the slow IPSP. The current-voltage relationship in the hyperpolarizing direction was essentially linear. The effect of membrane polarization is illustrated in Fig, 1C. Moderate hyperpolarizing current increased the amplitude of the slow IPSP, whereas moderate depolarizing current decreased the slow IPSP amplitude. Progressively stronger depolarizing current further decreased and then abolished the slow IPSP. Additional very strong