Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10585922›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal1999

Effects of channel cytoplasmic regions on the activation mechanisms of cardiac versus skeletal muscle Na(+) channels.

E S Bennett

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

E S BennettDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida 33612 USA. esbennet@com1.med.usf.edu
University of South Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional comparison of skeletal muscle (rSkM1) and cardiac (hH1) voltage-gated sodium channel isoforms expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells showed rSkM1 half-activation (V(a)) and inactivation (V(i)) voltages 7 and 10 mV more depolarized than hH1 V(a) and V(i), respectively. Internal papain perfusion removed fast inactivation from each isoform and caused a 20-mV hyperpolarizing shift in hH1 V(a), with an insignificant change in rSkM1 V(a). Activation voltage of the inactivation-deficient hH1 mutant, hH1Q3, was nearly identical to wild-type hH1 V(a), both before and after papain treatment, with hH1Q3 V(a) also shifted by nearly 20 mV after internal papain perfusion. These data indicate that while papain removes both hH1 and rSkM1 inactivation, it has a second effect only on hH1 that causes a shift in activation voltage. Internal treatment with an antibody directed against the III-IV linker essentially mimicked papain treatment by removing some inactivation from each isoform and causing a 12-mV shift in hH1 V(a), while rSkM1 V(a) remained constant. This suggests that some channel segment within, near, or interacting with the III-IV linker is involved in establishing hH1 activation voltage. Together the data show that rSkM1 and hH1 activation mechanisms are different and are the first to suggest a role for a cytoplasmic structure in the voltage-dependent activation of cardiac sodium channels.

Indexed as

Amino Acid SequenceAnimalsAntibodiesBiophysical PhenomenaBiophysicsCHO CellsCricetinaeCytoplasmHumansIon Channel GatingKineticsMembrane PotentialsMolecular Sequence DataMuscle, SkeletalMutationMyocardiumAntibodiesPapainProtein IsoformsRecombinant ProteinsSodium Channels

Identifiers

PMID10585922
PMCPMC1300571
OpenAlexW2092351084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.