4.5 Article

Stochastic Model of Gap Junctions Exhibiting Rectification and Multiple Closed States of Slow Gates

期刊

BIOPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 110, 期 6, 页码 1322-1333

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2016.01.035

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Council of Lithuania [MIP-76/2015]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01NS 072238]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gap-junction (GJ) channels formed from connexin (Cx) proteins provide direct pathways for electrical and metabolic cell-cell communication. Earlier, we developed a stochastic 16-state model (S16SM) of voltage gating of the GJ channel containing two pairs of fast and slow gates, each operating between open (o) and closed (c) states. However, experimental data suggest that gates may in fact contain two or more closed states. We developed a model in which the slow gate operates according to a linear reaction scheme, o <-> c(1)<-> c(2), where c(1) and c(2) are initial-closed and deep-closed states that both close the channel fully, whereas the fast gate operates between the open state and the closed state and exhibits a residual conductance. Thus, we developed a stochastic 36-state model (S36SM) of GJ channel gating that is sensitive to transjunctional voltage (V-j). To accelerate simulation and eliminate noise in simulated junctional conductance (g(j)) records, we transformed an S36SM into a Markov chain 36-state model (MC36SM) of GJ channel gating. This model provides an explanation for well-established experimental data, such as delayed g(j) recovery after V-j gating, hysteresis of g(j)-V-j dependence, and the low ratio of functional channels to the total number of GJ channels clustered in junctional plaques, and it has the potential to describe chemically mediated gating, which cannot be reflected using an S16SM. The MC36SM, when combined with global optimization algorithms, can be used for automated estimation of gating parameters including probabilities of c(1)<-> c(2) transitions from experimental gj-time and g(j)-V-j dependencies.

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

4.5
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