T-tubule localization of the inward-rectifier K+ channel in mouse ventricular myocytes: a role in K+ accumulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. The properties of the slow inward 'tail currents' (I(tail)) that followed depolarizing steps in voltage-clamped, isolated mouse ventricular myocytes were examined. Depolarizing steps that produced large outward K(+) currents in these myocytes were followed by a slowly decaying inward I(tail) on repolarization to the holding potential. These currents were produced only by depolarizations: inwardly rectifying K(+) currents, I(K1), produced by steps to potentials negative to the holding potential, were not followed by I(tail). 2. For depolarizations of equal duration, the magnitude of I(tail) increased as the magnitude of outward current at the end of the depolarizing step increased. The apparent reversal potential of I(tail) was dependent upon the duration of the depolarizing step, and the reversal potential shifted to more depolarized potentials as the duration of the depolarization was increased. 3. Removal of external Na(+) and Ca(2+) had no significant effect on the magnitude or time course of I(tail). BaCl(2) (0.25 mM), which had no effect on the magnitude of outward currents, abolished I(tail) and I(K1) simultaneously. 4. Accordingly, I(tail) in mouse ventricular myocytes probably results from K(+) accumulation in a restricted extracellular space such as the transverse tubule system (t-tubules). The efflux of K(+) into the t-tubules during outward currents produced by depolarization shifts the K(+) Nernst potential (E(K)) from its 'resting' value (close to -80 mV) to more depolarized potentials. This suggests that I(tail) is produced by I(K1) in the t-tubules and is inward because of the transiently elevated K(+) concentration and depolarized value of E(K) in the t-tubules. 5. Additional evidence for the localization of I(K1) channels in the t-tubules was provided by confocal microscopy using a specific antibody against Kir2.1 in mouse ventricular myocytes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".