AJP - Renal Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 234: F182-F191, 1978;
0363-6127/78 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hayslett, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Giebisch, G. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hayslett, J. P.
Right arrow Articles by Giebisch, G. H.

AJP - Renal Physiology, Vol 234, Issue 3 182-F191, Copyright © 1978 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Factors influencing transepithelial potential difference in mammalian distal tubule

J. P. Hayslett, E. L. Boulpaep and G. H. Giebisch

Studies were performed to examine some electrical properties of the mammalian distal tubule. Experiments were performed to evaluate the influence of changes in ion concentration in luminal fluid on transepithelial potential difference. Variations in the concentration of Na+ and K+, near the physiologic range, resulted in only modest changes in potential difference. During changes in Na+ the average slope, deltaV/ln C2/C1, was -1.52 +/- 0.39 mV and during variations in K+ the slope was -5.60 +/- 0.95 mV. Changes in Cl- concentration had no effect on transepithelial potential difference. Since the sum of transferase numbers did not equal 1, it seems likely that potential difference is influenced by a shunt current due to cellular rheogenic pumps. These data, therefore, indicate that variations in ion concentration in tubular fluid of the mammalian distal tubule do not significantly influence the resting transepithelial potential difference, and they suggest that analysis of permselective properties of the luminal cell membrane by transepithelial electrophysiologic approaches is probably invalid.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online