Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8229825›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of physiology1993

Effects of repeated tetanic stimulation on excitation-contraction coupling in cut muscle fibres of the frog.

S Györke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of physiology, 1993. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. 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.

S GyörkeDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston 77550.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

1. The effects of prolonged intermittent fatiguing stimulation were studied on various steps of excitation-contraction (E-C) coupling in cut single frog muscle fibres using the triple Vaseline voltage clamp and the fluorescent Ca2+ indicator rhod-2. 2. There were two phases of changes in amplitude of Ca2+ transients during fatiguing stimulation: first a 5-10% increase, then a larger decrease. The decrease in amplitude of Ca2+ transients was accompanied by a slowing down of the rate of decay of the transients and by an increase in resting [Ca2+]. 3. A complete recovery of both amplitude and time course of Ca2+ transients as well as of the resting [Ca2+] occurred within 1-3 min after cessation of fatiguing stimulation. 4. The changes in Ca2+ release signals during fatiguing stimulation were accompanied by decreases in the amplitude and the rate of decay of the action potentials as well as by a decrease in resting potential. However, these alterations are not likely to contribute to fatigue significantly, since fibres stimulated under voltage-clamp conditions, when the T-tubule voltage sensor is activated directly by applied voltage steps, showed similar fatiguability to fibres stimulated by action potentials under current-clamp conditions. 5. Simultaneous measurements of intramembrane charge movement and [Ca2+] revealed that the decrease in sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR) Ca2+ release during fatiguing stimulation is not accompanied by any significant change in charge movement. 6. These results suggest that fatigue caused by repeated tetanic stimulation develops primarily at the level of SR Ca2+ release with only small possible additional effects at the level of membrane excitability and action potential propagation along the surface/T-tubule membrane. The T-tubule voltage sensor with this type of stimulation is virtually fatigue resistant.

Indexed as

Muscle ContractionAction PotentialsAnimalsElectric StimulationElectrophysiologyHistological TechniquesIn Vitro TechniquesMusclesRana catesbeiana

Identifiers

PMID8229825
PMCPMC1175409

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.