Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9417135›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of general physiology1998

Voltage-dependent membrane displacements measured by atomic force microscopy.

J Mosbacher, M Langer, J K Hörber, F Sachs

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of general physiology, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Acoustic neuromodulation from a basic science prospective.Journal of therapeutic ultrasound · 2016
    Review
  9. Nanotechnology in Auditory Research: Membrane Electromechanics in Hearing.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2016
    Review
  10. The potential and electric field in the cochlear outer hair cell membrane.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2015
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Signaling by neuronal swelling.Science signaling · 2011
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Electromechanical coupling in the membranes of Shaker-transfected HEK cells.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2009
    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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

J MosbacherDepartment of Cell Biophysics, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany D-69117, USA.
M Langer
J K Hörber
F Sachs
University of Tübingen · DEEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory · DEUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cells use polar molecules in the membrane to sense changes in the transmembrane potential. The opening of voltage-gated ion channels and membrane bending due to the inverse flexoelectric effect are two examples of such electromechanical coupling. We have looked for membrane motions in an electric field using atomic (or scanning) force microscopy (AFM) with the intent of studying voltage-dependent conformational changes of ion channels. Voltage-clamped HEK293 cells were either untransfected controls or transfected with Shaker K+ channels. Using a +/- 10-mV peak-peak AC carrier stimulus, untransfected cells moved 0.5-15 nm normal to the plane of the membrane. These movements tracked the voltage at frequencies >1 kHz with a phase lead of 60-120 degrees, as expected of a displacement current. The movement was outward with depolarization, but the holding potential only weakly influenced the amplitude of the movement. In contrast, cells transfected with a noninactivating mutant of Shaker K+channels showed similar movements, but these were sensitive to the holding potential; decreasing with depolarization between -80 and 0 mV. Searching for artifactual origins of these movements, we used open or sealed pipettes and AFM cantilever placements just above the cells. These results were negative, suggesting that the observed movements were produced by the cell membrane rather than by movement of the patch pipette, or by acoustic or electrical interactions of the membrane with the AFM tip. In control cells, the electrical motor may arise from the flexoelectric effect, where changes in potential induce changes in curvature. In transfected cells, it appears that channel-specific movements also occurred. These experiments demonstrate that the AFM may be able to exploit voltage-dependent movements as a source of contrast for imaging membrane components. The electrically induced motility will cause twitching during action potentials, and may have physiological consequences.

Indexed as

ArtifactsCell MembraneCells, CulturedCytoskeletonElectric ConductivityHumansIon Channel GatingKidneyMembrane PotentialsMicroscopy, Atomic ForcePatch-Clamp TechniquesPotassium ChannelsShaker Superfamily of Potassium ChannelsStress, MechanicalTransfectionPotassium ChannelsShaker Superfamily of Potassium Channels

Identifiers

PMID9417135
PMCPMC1887771
OpenAlexW2051437378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.