ArticleThe Journal of general physiology2004
Inhibition of the collapse of the Shaker K+ conductance by specific scorpion toxins.
Article in The Journal of general physiology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scorpion toxins prefer salt solutions.Journal of molecular modeling · 2015Article
- Quinidine interaction with Shab K+ channels: pore block and irreversible collapse of the K+ conductance.The Journal of physiology · 2010Article
- Stability of the Shab K+ channel conductance in 0 K+ solutions: the role of the membrane potential.Biophysical journal · 2007Article
- K+-dependent stability and ion conduction of Shab K+ channels: a comparison with Shaker channels.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Shaker B K(+) conductance (G(K)) collapses when the channels are closed (deactivated) in Na(+) solutions that lack K(+) ions. Also, it is known that external TEA (TEA(o)) impedes the collapse of G(K), and that channel block by TEA(o) and scorpion toxins are two mutually exclusive events. Therefore, we tested the ability of scorpion toxins to inhibit the collapse of G(K) in 0 K(+). We have found that these toxins are not uniform regarding the capacity to protect G(K). Those toxins, whose binding to the channels is destabilized by external K(+), are also effective inhibitors of the collapse of G(K). In addition to K(+), other externally added cations also destabilize toxin block, with an effectiveness that does not match the selectivity sequence of K(+) channels. The inhibition of the drop of G(K) follows a saturation relationship with [toxin], which is fitted well by the Michaelis-Menten equation, with an apparent Kd bigger than that of block of the K(+) current. However, another plausible model is also presented and compared with the Michaelis-Menten model. The observations suggest that those toxins that protect G(K) in 0 K(+) do so by interacting either with the most external K(+) binding site of the selectivity filter (suggesting that the K(+) occupancy of only that site of the pore may be enough to preserve G(K)) or with sites capable of binding K(+) located in the outer vestibule of the pore, above the selectivity filter.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.