The Journal of General Physiology
Cell MicroControls
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

Published online
doi:10.1085/jgp.200809988
The Journal of General Physiology, Vol. 132, No. 2, 239-250
The Rockefeller University Press, 0022-1295 $30.00
© Obejero-Paz et al.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 4197K)
Right arrow PPT slides of all figures
Right arrow Supplemental Material Index
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JGP
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Obejero-Paz, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, S. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Obejero-Paz, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, S. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

ARTICLE

Ni2+ Block of CaV3.1 ({alpha}1G) T-type Calcium Channels



Carlos A. Obejero-Paz, I. Patrick Gray, and Stephen W. Jones

Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106

Correspondence to Stephen W. Jones: swj{at}case.edu

Ni2+ inhibits current through calcium channels, in part by blocking the pore, but Ni2+ may also allosterically affect channel activity via sites outside the permeation pathway. As a test for pore blockade, we examined whether the effect of Ni2+ on CaV3.1 is affected by permeant ions. We find two components to block by Ni2+, a rapid block with little voltage dependence, and a slow block most visible as accelerated tail currents. Rapid block is weaker for outward vs. inward currents (apparent Kd = 3 vs. 1 mM Ni2+, with 2 mM Ca2+ or Ba2+) and is reduced at high permeant ion concentration (110 vs. 2 mM Ca2+ or Ba2+). Slow block depends both on the concentration and on the identity of the permeant ion (Ca2+ vs. Ba2+ vs. Na+). Slow block is 2–3x faster in Ba2+ than in Ca2+ (2 or 110 mM), and is ~10x faster with 2 vs. 110 mM Ca2+ or Ba2+. Slow block is orders of magnitude slower than the diffusion limit, except in the nominal absence of divalent cations (~3 µM Ca2+). We conclude that both fast and slow block of CaV3.1 by Ni2+ are most consistent with occlusion of the pore. The exit rate of Ni2+ for slow block is reduced at high Ni2+ concentrations, suggesting that the site responsible for fast block can "lock in" slow block by Ni2+, at a site located deeper within the pore. In contrast to the complex pore block observed for CaV3.1, inhibition of CaV3.2 by Ni2+ was essentially independent of voltage, and was similar in 2 mM Ca2+ vs. Ba2+, consistent with inhibition by a different mechanism, at a site outside the pore.


Abbreviation used in this paper: IIV, instantaneous current-voltage relationship.

© 2008 Obejero-Paz et al. This article is distributed under the terms of an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike–No Mirror Sites license for the first six months after the publication date (see http://www.jgp.org/misc/terms.shtml). After six months it is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported license, as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/).


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JGPHome page
N. Khan, I. P. Gray, C. A. Obejero-Paz, and S. W. Jones
Permeation and Gating in CaV3.1 ({alpha}1G) T-type Calcium Channels Effects of Ca2+, Ba2+, Mg2+, and Na+
J. Gen. Physiol., August 1, 2008; 132(2): 223 - 238.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents