Table 1. Comparison of Boltzmann fit... | Rockefeller University Press

Table 1.

Comparison of Boltzmann fit parameters from normalized conductance (G) or change in fluorescence (ΔF) for spHCN^WT, spHCN^R332C in 100K solution

	Parameter	spHCN^WT (5)	spHCN^R332C
	Parameter	spHCN^WT (5)	Unlabeled (3)	ALEXA-488 (5)	MTS-TAMRA (8)
G	V_0.5^G (mV)	−56.1 ± 2.4	−126.9 ± 2.4	−114.6 ± 2.4^{^a}	−88.7 ± 3.9^{^a}
G	z^G	1.30 ± 0.12	1.17 ± 0.13	1.24 ± 0.09^{^a}	0.94 ± 0.09^{^a}
∆F	∆F_total			ALEXA-488 (14)	MTS-TAMRA (7)
	V_0.5^F (mV)			−71.9 ± 1.7^{^a}	−59.0 ± 6.0^{^a}
	z^F			1.05 ± 0.06^{^a}	0.66 ± 0.07^{^a}
	∆F_fast
	V_0.5^F (mV)			−96.4 ± 2.0	−93.5 ± 12.2
	z^F			0.77 ± 0.04	0.97 ± 0.29
	∆F_slow
	V_0.5^F (mV)			−53.3 ± 2.10^{^a}	−38.0 ± 2.10^{^a}
	z^F			1.51 ± 0.16	1.19 ± 0.01

	Parameter	spHCN^WT (5)	spHCN^R332C
	Parameter	spHCN^WT (5)	Unlabeled (3)	ALEXA-488 (5)	MTS-TAMRA (8)
G	V_0.5^G (mV)	−56.1 ± 2.4	−126.9 ± 2.4	−114.6 ± 2.4^{^a}	−88.7 ± 3.9^{^a}
G	z^G	1.30 ± 0.12	1.17 ± 0.13	1.24 ± 0.09^{^a}	0.94 ± 0.09^{^a}
∆F	∆F_total			ALEXA-488 (14)	MTS-TAMRA (7)
	V_0.5^F (mV)			−71.9 ± 1.7^{^a}	−59.0 ± 6.0^{^a}
	z^F			1.05 ± 0.06^{^a}	0.66 ± 0.07^{^a}
	∆F_fast
	V_0.5^F (mV)			−96.4 ± 2.0	−93.5 ± 12.2
	z^F			0.77 ± 0.04	0.97 ± 0.29
	∆F_slow
	V_0.5^F (mV)			−53.3 ± 2.10^{^a}	−38.0 ± 2.10^{^a}
	z^F			1.51 ± 0.16	1.19 ± 0.01

Values are shown as mean ± SE as reported by fit to normalized pooled data using the Boltzmann equation (Eq. 1). Number of cells analyzed given in parentheses. ∆F_totalmeasured at end of 1-s test pulse at each potential for both labels. ∆F_fast,slow refer to components obtained by fitting a single exponential plus offset to ALEX-488 data or double exponential to MTS-TAMRA data (see text).

Indicates significant difference between ALEXA and MTS-TAMRA fit parameters (t test, P < 0.05).

View Large

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only