Advertisement

The Journal of Membrane Biology

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 313–334 | Cite as

Volume flows and pressure changes during an action potential in cells ofChara australis

I. Experimental results
  • Peter H. Barry
Article

Summary

Methods have been used for monitoring either volume flows or pressure changes, simultaneously with membrane potentials, in giant algal cells ofChara australis during an action potential. The volume flows were measured from the movement of a mercury bead in a capillary tube recorded by a photo-transducer. The pressure changes were measured by monitoring the deflection of a thin wedge, resting transversely across a cell, and using the same photo-transducer, the deflection of the wedge being directly related to the cell's turgor pressure. The average maximum rate of volume flow per unit area during an action potential was 0.88±0.11 nliter·sec−1·cm−2 in the direction of an outflow from the cell (total volume outflow being about 3 nliter·cm−2 per action potential). Similarly, the maximum rate of change of pressure was 19.6±3.8×10−3 atm·sec−1 (peak change being 19.3±2.9×10−3 atm equivalent to 14.7±2.2 mm Hg). The volume flow and pressure changes followed the vacuolar potential quite closely, the peak rate of volume flow lagging behind the peak of the action potential by 0.17±0.08 sec and the peak rate of pressure change leading it by 0.09±0.07 sec.

Keywords

Mercury Membrane Potential Human Physiology Unit Area Maximum Rate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barry, P. H. 1967. Investigation of the movement of water and ions in plant cell membranes. Ph. D. Thesis. University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
  2. — 1970. Volume flows and pressure changes during an action potential in cells ofChara australis. II. Theoretical considerations.J. Membrane Biol. 3:335.Google Scholar
  3. —, Hope, A. B. 1969. Electro-osmosis in membranes: Effects of unstirred layers and transport numbers. Part II. Experimental.Biophys. J. 9:729.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Courant, R. 1937. Differential and Integral Calculus, Vol. I. (2nd Ed.). Blackie and Sons Ltd, London and Glasgow.Google Scholar
  5. Fensom, D. S. 1966. Action potential sand associated waterflows in livingNitella.Canad. J. Botany 44:1432.Google Scholar
  6. Kishimoto, U., Ohkawa, T. 1966. Shortening ofNitella internode during excitation.Plant Cell Physiol. 7:493.Google Scholar
  7. Kobatake, Y., Fujita, O. 1964a. Flows through charged membranes. I. Flipflop current vs. voltage relation.J. Chem. Phys. 40:2212.Google Scholar
  8. —— 1964b. Flows through charged membranes. II. Oscillation phenomena.J. Chem. Phys. 40:2219.Google Scholar
  9. Tazawa, M. 1957. Neue Methode zur Messung des Osmotischen Wertes einer Zelle.Protoplasma 48:342.Google Scholar
  10. Teorell, T. 1958. Transport processes in membranes in relation to the nerve mechanism.Exp. Cell Res. 5:83.Google Scholar
  11. — 1961. An analysis of the current-voltage relationship in excitableNitella cells.Acta Physiol. Scand. 53:1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1970

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter H. Barry
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Biophysics Laboratory, School of Biological SciencesFlinders UniversityBedford Park
  2. 2.Department of Physiology, School of Medicine, Center for the Health SciencesUniversity of CaliforniaLos Angeles

Personalised recommendations