↓ Skip to main content

Effects of temperature on human L-type cardiac Ca2+ channels expressed in Xenopus oocytes

Overview of attention for article published in Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology, May 1998
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
Effects of temperature on human L-type cardiac Ca2+ channels expressed in Xenopus oocytes
Published in
Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology, May 1998
DOI 10.1007/s004240050628
Pubmed ID
Authors

T. J. A. Allen, Gabor Mikala

Abstract

Temperature normally affects peak L-type Ca2+ channel (CaCh) current with a temperature coefficient (Q10) of between 1.8 and 3.5; in cardiomyocytes attenuating protein kinase A activity increases Q10 whilst activating it lowers Q10. We examine temperature effects using cloned human cardiac CaChs expressed in Xenopus oocytes. Peak inward currents (IBa) through expressed CaChs (i.e. alpha1C alpha2/deltaa beta1b) exhibited a Q10 of 5.8+/-0.4 when examined between 15 and 25 degreesC. The nifedipine-sensitive IBa exhibited a higher Q10 of 8.7+/-0.5, whilst the nifedipine-insensitive IBa exhibited Q10 of 3.7+/-0.3. Current/voltage (I/V) relationships shifted to negative potentials on warming. Using instead a different CaCh beta subunit isoform, beta2c, gave rise to an IBa similar to those expressed using beta1b. We utilized a carboxyl deletion mutant, alpha1C-Delta1633, to determine the temperature sensitivity of the pore moiety in the absence of auxiliary subunits; IBa through this channel exhibited a Q10 of 9.3+/-0.3. However, the Q10 for macroscopic conductance was reduced compared to that of heteromeric channels; decreasing from 5.0 (i.e. alpha1C alpha2/deltaa beta1b) and 3.9 (i.e. alpha1C alpha2/deltaa beta2c) to 2.4 (alpha1C-Delta1633). These observations differ markedly from those made in studies of cardiomyocytes, and suggest that enhanced sensitivity may depend on the membrane environment, channel assembly or other regulatory factors.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 20%
United States 1 10%
Unknown 7 70%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 30%
Professor 2 20%
Researcher 2 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 10%
Student > Postgraduate 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 50%
Neuroscience 2 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 10%
Unknown 2 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2007.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology
#513
of 2,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,691
of 33,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 33,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them