Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7707358›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of membrane biology1994

Neurotransmitter release at fast synapses.

H Parnas, I Parnas

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of membrane biology, 1994. 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Interplay of Lipids and Peptides in Membrane Merger.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H ParnasDepartment of Neurobiology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel.
I Parnas
Hebrew University of Jerusalem · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As stated at the beginning of this review, the mechanism of neurotransmitter release is not yet known. Keeping this in mind, we shall, nevertheless, attempt to speculate and outline a possible scenario of events as it emerges from the foregoing discussion. At resting membrane potentials, the release machinery is in a blocked state produced by the constant presence in the synaptic cleft of neurotransmitter at low concentrations. At resting potentials, Ca2+ channels are closed, but this is probably not associated with the presence of low levels of neurotransmitter. Upon arrival of the action potential at the nerve terminal, (as suggested by the Ca-voltage hypothesis) two things happen independently: The release machinery is relieved of its block, being activated and readied to trigger release. Concurrently, Ca2+ enters the presynaptic terminal, and together with specific Ca2+ binding proteins, it abolishes the hydration repulsive forces without which the intimate contact between the vesicle and the plasmatic release machinery is not possible. The biophysical meaning of triggering release is at present not known. There are several suggestions, the one most consistent with the arguments of this review being the mechanism discussed and modeled by Nanavati et al. (1992; see also review: Monck & Fernandez, 1992). According to that hypothesis, an activated scaffold of proteins forms a dimple in the plasma membrane upon stimulation. This dimple, which exhibits high tension--perhaps together with Ca(2+)--overcomes the repulsive forces of hydration, permitting the two membranes to "jump" into intimate contact. As a result, a single hemifused bilayer is formed. In this hemifused bilayer, a lipidic fusion pore opens. In the context of the lipidic fusion pore hypothesis, the role of the depolarization-dependent triggering could be to start those manipulations in the plasmatic membrane that result in increased lateral bilayer tension and formation of the dimple. Ca2+ could then, in view of reduced repulsive forces and increased attractive forces, be responsible for the intimate docking of the vesicle at the release site. Under such conditions, hemifusion could take place with the final formation of the lipidic fusion pore. Finally, once the fusion pore opens, discharge of the vesicular content takes place immediately and lasts for up to 50-70 microseconds. To be so fast, discharge must occur by a mechanism other than diffusion, possibly by ion-exchange (R. Khanin, H. Parnas and L. Segel, in preparation).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Indexed as

AnimalsCalciumCalcium ChannelsExocytosisKineticsNeurotransmitter AgentsSynapsesSynaptic VesiclesTemperatureCalciumCalcium ChannelsNeurotransmitter Agents

Identifiers

PMID7707358
OpenAlexW2037620792

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.