Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2018 Aug 6;150(8):1107–1124. doi: 10.1085/jgp.201812072

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2018 Pulido and Marty

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.rupress.org/terms/). After six months it is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 4.0 International license, as described at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).

PMC Copyright notice

Figure 6. — Effect of presynaptic holding potential on synaptic success rate and on docking site release probability. (A) Top: Success (colored bars)/failure (white) sequences for a series of 40 consecutive trials. Bottom: Synaptic success probability as a function of i (P[S_i]), showing increased synaptic depression with depolarizing holding potential (red, −50 mV; black, −60 mV; blue, −80 mV; same experiment as in Fig. 5, B and C). (B) Group results (25 Hz, n = 12; 50 Hz, n = 8) showing that the success probability at i = 1 is not affected by prepulse holding potential; however, from i = 2, there is a decrease in success probability with presynaptic depolarization. This effect is strongest for i = 2 and i = 3. (C) Release probability per docking site (P_D[S_i]) as a function of i, showing, as in B, in depolarizing conditions a strong depression in response to the second AP followed by a rebound. (D) Top: PPR values derived from C as a function of holding potential, showing a strong reduction with depolarization (mean ± SEM, 25 Hz: 0.15 ± 0.04 at −50 mV, 0.36 ± 0.04 at −60 mV, 0.5 ± 0.09 at −80 mV; 50 Hz: 0.07 ± 0.03 at −50 mV, 0.27 ± 0.1 at −60 mV, 0.66 ± 0.17 at −80 mV). Bottom: Estimated docking site occupancy before the second stimulation as a function of holding potential (mean ± SEM, 25 Hz: 0.08 ± 0.02 at −50 mV, 0.18 ± 0.07 at −60 mV, 0.25 ± 0.04 at −80 mV; 50 Hz: 0.03 ± 0.01 at −50 mV, 0.13 ± 0.05 at −60 mV, 0.33 ± 0.08 at −80 mV). In B and C, statistically significant differences between the results for i = 2 and the results at steady state are indicated as follows: *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01.