TABLE I.
Inhibitor/conditiona | 2.62 mM basal bath [HCO3]-induced pHi responseb | ||||||
Apical | Basal | Data | Control | w/inhibitor | Recovery | Pc | n |
DIDS | ΔpHi | −0.20 ± 0.04 | −0.09 ± 0.05 | −0.12 ± 0.03 | <0.05 | 5 | |
H+ flux | −6.5 ± 1.2 | −3.6 ± 2.7 | −4.3 ± 1.3 | <0.05 | |||
Na-free | Na-free | ΔpHi | −0.21 ± 0.04 | −0.08 ± 0.01 | −0.14 ± 0.02 | <0.05 | 3 |
H+ flux | −7.2 ± 1.7 | −2.8 ± 0.7 | −4.9 ± 0.8 | <0.05 | |||
amiloride | ΔpHi | −0.22 ± 0.03 | −0.28 ± 0.05 | −0.21 ± 0.04 | <0.05 | 5 | |
H+ flux | −7.1 ± 1.3 | −8.3 ± 1.6 | −5.7 ± 1.4 | <0.05 | |||
bumetanide | ΔpHi | −0.20 ± 0.03 | −0.21 ± 0.03 | −0.22 ± 0.03 | >0.05 | 4 | |
H+ flux | −6.9 ± 1.8 | −6.8 ± 0.9 | −7.6 ± 1.6 | >0.05 | |||
ouabain | ΔpHi | −0.18 ± 0.02 | −0.20 ± 0.02 | −0.23 ± 0.03 | >0.05 | 3 | |
H+ flux | −5.1 ± 2.1 | −5.4 ± 3.2 | −5.7 ± 2.7 | >0.05 | |||
DIDS | ΔpHi | −0.19 ± 0.03 | −0.23 ± 0.03 | −0.21 ± 0.01 | <0.05 | 7 | |
H+ flux | −5.0 ± 1.1 | −6.0 ± 1.1 | −5.3 ± 0.9 | <0.05 | |||
DZA | ΔpHi | −0.17 ± 0.01 | −0.18 ± 0.03 | −0.18 ± 0.02 | >0.05 | 4 | |
H+ flux | −5.2 ± 0.3 | −5.1 ± 0.7 | −5.6 ± 0.4 | >0.05 | |||
13% CO2 | ΔpHi | −0.21 ± 0.05 | −0.20 ± 0.03 | −0.24 ± 0.04 | >0.05 | 9 | |
H+ flux | −6.0 ± 1.3 | −6.1 ± 2.3 | −6.5 ± 1.4 | >0.05 | |||
1% CO2 | ΔpHi | −0.24 ± 0.08 | −0.20 ± 0.06 | −0.20 ± 0.06 | >0.05 | 5 | |
H+ flux | −7.2 ± 1.8 | −10.7 ± 1.9 | −6.0 ± 1.3 | <0.05 |
Blank cells indicate that control Ringer was perfused into the corresponding bath.
H+ flux has units of mM × min−1, and all values are reported as mean ± SD.
The basal bath Δ[HCO3]-induced pHi response in control Ringer was compared to the pHi response in the presence of the inhibitor/condition; P < 0.05 is considered significant by Student’s t test.