ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2016
Accommodation to hyperpolarization of human axons assessed in the frequency domain.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A nociceptor excitability test for identifying alterations of the Nav1.7 channels in humans.Pain · 2026Article
- HCN channel-mediated neuromodulation can control action potential velocity and fidelity in central axons.eLife · 2019Article
- From Perception Threshold to Ion Channels-A Computational Study.Biophysical journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human axons in vivo were subjected to subthreshold currents with a threshold impedance amplitude profile to allow the use of frequency domain techniques to determine the propensity for resonant behavior and to clarify the relative contributions of different ion channels to their low-frequency responsiveness. Twenty-four studies were performed on the motor and sensory axons of the median nerve in six subjects. The response to oscillatory currents was tested between direct current (DC) and 16 Hz. A resonant peak at ∼2-2.5 Hz was found in the response of hyperpolarized axons, but there was only a small broad response in axons at resting membrane potential (RMP). A mathematical model of axonal excitability developed using DC pulses provided a good fit to the frequency response for human axons and indicated that the hyperpolarization-activated current Ih and the slow potassium current IKs are principally responsible for the resonance. However, the results indicate that if axons are hyperpolarized by more than -60% of resting threshold, the only conductances that are appreciably active are Ih and the leak conductance, i.e., that the activity of these conductances can be studied in vivo virtually in isolation at hyperpolarized membrane potentials. Given that the leak conductance dampens resonance, it is suggested that the -60% hyperpolarization used here is optimal for Ih As expected, differences between the frequency responses of motor and sensory axons were present and best explained by reduced slow potassium conductance GKs, up-modulation of Ih, and increased persistent Na(+) current INaP (due to depolarization of RMP) in sensory axons.
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.