home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!cattell.psych.upenn.edu!barkdoll
- From: barkdoll@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Edwin Barkdoll)
- Newsgroups: bionet.plants
- Subject: Re: Action potentials (was: Plant communication/sensing re)
- Message-ID: <103110@netnews.upenn.edu>
- Date: 23 Dec 92 22:28:38 GMT
- References: <1992Dec22.172603.15056@mail.cornell.edu> <1992Dec23.191118.7933@mail.cornell.edu>
- Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
- Organization: University of Pennsylvania
- Lines: 67
- Nntp-Posting-Host: cattell.psych.upenn.edu
-
- In article <1992Dec23.191118.7933@mail.cornell.edu> Thomas_Bjorkman@cornell.edu (Thomas Bjorkman) writes:
- [...]
-
- >I brought up channels because the ion specificity of the channels that
- >generate the action potential pretty much determines which ions are
- >involved.
-
- Well, no. The Goldman-Hodgkin-Katz constant field equation
- explicitly include permeability (related to the channel conductance)
- and concentration of the ion. If one were to go simply by ion
- specificity determined by patch clamp experiments, one would have to
- assume that Li+ is an equal contributor in the squid axon action
- potential and contributes more than sodium in the vertebrate
- photoreceptor dark current, both of which are false.
-
- >The patch clamp is the tool that answers that question most
- >directly.
-
- Again I disagree. The voltage clamp techniques developed by
- Cole, Curtis, Hodgkin... proved equally direct information about
- membrane currents. The currents may be macroscopic but they can
- equally direct measurements of ionic contribution.
-
- > Dainty, Hope and Walker had a pretty good picture of action
- >potentials in Chara by the early 1960's.
-
- Actually I think Gaffey and Mullins made that comparison in
- 1958.
-
- >Bruce Scott makes an explicit
- >comparison between Chara and squid axons in his ca.1962 Scientific
- >Ameican article. The abstact begins "Electrical disturbances similar to
- >the nerve impule are associated with a number of plant life processes."
- >Did I miss a posting where someone actually suggested that Na was involed
- >in plant action potentials?
-
- I think so -- that is the issue which started this thread:
-
- In article <1992Dec18.145440.19868@pixel.kodak.com> young@serum.kodak.com writes:
-
- > Clearly, there is a fundamental difference of opinion regarding the action
- > of Na+ and K+ in this area...either that, or my ignorance is showing, which
- > is entirely possible. :-)
-
- > This is interesting...apparently there is some disagreement in this area?
- > I lifted the following from a different newsgroup written by Bill Williams
- > of St. Mary's College of Maryland in message <13812@umd5.umd.edu> in
- > reference to mimosa pudica:
- >
- >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- >Sensing of environment: I'm not too sure what the actual sensing mechanism is,
- >but the signal is an action potential, just like in an animal's
- > neurons.
- > A
- >charge separation propagates along the cells, causing sodium and potassium
- >channels in their membranes to open and close, which alters the membrane
- >potential and thus passes the signal along to the next patch of membrane.
- >Plant action potentials are usually much, much slower to propagate than animal
- >action potentials.
-
- Bill quite explicitly refers Na and K channels
- without mention of Cl or other channels.
-
-
- Edwin Barkdoll
- barkdoll@cattell.psych.upenn.edu
- eb3@world.std.com
-