4.7 Article

Transduction without Tip Links in Cochlear Hair Cells Is Mediated by Ion Channels with Permeation Properties Distinct from Those of the Mechano-Electrical Transducer Channel

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 34, 期 16, 页码 5505-5514

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4086-13.2014

关键词

aminoglycoside antibiotics; cochlea; hair cell; mechano-electrical transduction

资金

  1. MRC
  2. Wellcome Trust [091895, 087737]
  3. Medical Research Council [MR/K005561/1, 1095103] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [MR/K005561/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tip links between adjacent stereocilia are believed to gate mechano-electrical transducer (MET) channels and mediate the electrical responses of sensory hair cells. We found that mouse auditory hair cells that lack tip links due to genetic mutations or exposure to the Ca2+ chelator BAPTA can, however, still respond to mechanical stimuli. These MET currents have unusual properties and are predominantly of the opposite polarity relative to those measured when tip links are present. There are other striking differences, for example, the channels are usually all closed when the hair cell is not stimulated and the currents in response to strong stimuli can be substantially larger than normal. These anomalous MET currents can also be elicited early in development, before the onset of mechano-electrical transduction with normal response polarity. Current-voltage curves of the anomalous MET currents are linear and do not show the rectification characteristic of normal MET currents. The permeant MET channel blocker dihydrostreptomycin is two orders of magnitude less effective in blocking the anomalous MET currents. The findings suggest the presence of a large population of MET channels with pore properties that are distinct from those of normal MET channels. These channels are not gated by hair-bundle links and can be activated under a variety of conditions in which normal tip-link-mediated transduction is not operational.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据