4.4 Article

Calcium-dependent fast depolarizing afterpotentials in vasopressin neurons in the rat supraoptic nucleus

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 98, 期 5, 页码 2612-2621

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00599.2007

关键词

-

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [R03 HD-45634] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS-23941] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oxytocin (OT) and vasopressin (VP) synthesizing magnocellular cells (MNCs) in the supraoptic nucleus (SON) display distinct firing patterns during the physiological demands for these hormones. Depolarizing afterpotentials (DAPs) in these neurons are involved in controlling phasic bursting in VP neurons. Our whole cell recordings demonstrated a Cs+-resistant fast DAP (fDAP; decay tau = similar to 200 ms), which has not been previously reported, in addition to the well-known Cs+-sensitive slower DAP (sDAP; decay tau = similar to 2 s). Immunoidentification of recorded neurons revealed that all VP neurons, but only 20% of OT neurons, expressed the fDAP. The activation of the fDAP required influx of Ca2(+) through voltage-gated Ca2+ channels as it was strongly suppressed in Ca2+ -free extracellular solution or by bath application of Cd2+. Additionally, the current underlying the fDAP (I-fDAP) is a Ca2+-activated current rather than a Ca2+ current per se as it was abolished by strongly buffering intracellular Ca2+ with BAPTA. The I-V relationship of the I fDAP was linear at potentials less than -60 mV but showed pronounced outward rectification near -50 mV. I-fDAP is sensitive to changes in extracellular Na+ and K+ but not Cl-. A blocker of Ca2+-activated nonselective cation (CAN) currents, flufenamic acid, blocked the fDAP, suggesting the involvement of a CAN current in the generation of fDAP in VP neurons. We speculate that the two DAPs have different roles in generating after burst discharges and could play important roles in determining the distinct firing properties of VP neurons in the SON neurons.

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

4.4
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