Haller M, Heinemann C, Chow R H, Heidelberger R, Neher E
Department of Membrane Biophysics, Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Göttingen, Germany.
Biophys J. 1998 Apr;74(4):2100-13. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(98)77917-2.
We have compared capacitance and amperometric measurements in bovine chromaffin cells when secretion was elicited by flash photolysis of caged-calcium or step depolarizations. Total amperometric charge depended linearly on the amount of capacitance increase in both types of experiments. Furthermore, the properties of resolvable amperometric spikes after flashes were comparable to those observed after depolarizations, and their timing was compatible with the rate of capacitance increase. For a more detailed comparison, we used Monte Carlo simulations of multiple amperometric events occurring randomly over the surface of a sphere and summing together, to generate a reference amperometric signal for a given measured capacitance increase. Even after correction for endocytotic processes, the time courses of the integrated experimental records lagged behind the integrated Monte Carlo records by approximately 50 ms in flash and depolarization experiments. This delay was larger by approximately 40 ms than what can be expected from the "pre-foot delay" or the foot duration. Possible sources for the remaining delay could be diffusional barriers like the patch-pipette and the chamber bottom, which are not taken into account in the model. We also applied a novel type of fluctuation analysis to estimate the relative quantum size of an amperometric event. On average the estimates from experimental amperometric traces, in both flash and depolarization experiments, were 3-5 times smaller than estimates from simulated ones. This discrepancy can be due to contributions to the amperometric current from small vesicles, preferred release from cellular regions orientated toward the chamber bottom, or abundance of "foot-only" events. In conclusion, amperometric signals in flash and depolarization experiments displayed similar delayed average time courses and a lower estimate for the relative quantum size compared to the modeled amperometric signals. However, individual amperometric spikes were in agreement with expectations derived from capacitance signals.
我们比较了在牛嗜铬细胞中,通过笼锁钙的闪光光解或阶跃去极化引发分泌时的电容测量和电流测量。在这两种类型的实验中,总电流电荷均与电容增加量呈线性关系。此外,闪光后可分辨的电流尖峰的特性与去极化后观察到的特性相当,并且它们的时间与电容增加速率相符。为了进行更详细的比较,我们使用蒙特卡罗模拟来处理在球体表面随机发生并汇总在一起的多个电流事件,以生成给定测量电容增加量的参考电流信号。即使在校正内吞过程后,在闪光和去极化实验中,综合实验记录的时间进程仍比综合蒙特卡罗记录滞后约50毫秒。这种延迟比“前足延迟”或足持续时间预期的要大大约40毫秒。剩余延迟的可能来源可能是诸如膜片吸管和腔室底部等扩散屏障,而模型中未考虑这些因素。我们还应用了一种新型的波动分析来估计电流事件的相对量子大小。平均而言,在闪光和去极化实验中,实验电流迹线的估计值比模拟值小3至5倍。这种差异可能是由于小囊泡对电流的贡献、从朝向腔室底部的细胞区域优先释放,或大量“仅足”事件所致。总之,与模拟电流信号相比,闪光和去极化实验中的电流信号显示出相似的延迟平均时间进程,并且相对量子大小的估计值较低。然而,单个电流尖峰与从电容信号得出的预期相符。