Skip to main content
. 2001 Mar;132(5):973–982. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0703916

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Effects of Kir6.2 mutations on DIDS block. (Top) Schematic model of Kir6.2, with the positions of the C terminus (C), N terminus (N), transmembrane domains (TM1, TM2), pore loop (P) and various residues indicated. (A) Mean KATP current remaining in the presence of 0.7 mM DIDS (I), expressed as a fraction of that in the absence of the compound (IC). Oocytes were coinjected with SUR1 and mutant Kir6.2, as indicated. The number of patches ranged between 3–6 for each mutant. (B) Mean recovery of the KATP current after removal of 0.7 mM DIDS. Steady-state currents recorded following removal of DIDS (I2) are expressed as a fraction of that before its application (I1). Oocytes were coinjected with SUR1 and mutant Kir6.2, as indicated. The number of patches ranged between 3–6 for each mutant. Currents were not corrected for rundown.