Skip to main content
. 2019 Sep 20;13:415. doi: 10.3389/fncel.2019.00415

FIGURE 6.

FIGURE 6

The transmembrane potentials and channel currents of PC12 cells with or without NGF treatment. (A) Resting potential (RP) recorded at a current-clamping mode in NGF-pretreated PC12 cells, note that blocking HCN channels with IVA (10 μmol/l) hyperpolarized the RP. (B) Suspicious action potentials evoked by electric pulses in NGF-untreated and NGF-treated PC12 cells (recorded at a current-clamping mode). Note that cells showed regular depolarization but immature repolarization potentially because of the large outward rectification. NGF treatment likely improved the repolarization. (C) Macrocurrents elicited by a stimulating protocol for activating voltage-gated Na+ channel in the absence of any channel blocker. No inward (supposing Na+) current was recorded, suggesting that PC12 cells did not develop mature voltage-gated Na+ channel even treated with NGF for certain time. (D) Macrocurrents recorded using a stimulating protocol for activating K+ channels in the absence of any channel blocker. Outward (K+) currents were recorded. (E,F) HCN channel currents recorded in NGF-untreated PC12 cells at a voltage clamping mode. The currents were blocked or partially blocked by IVA (E), CsCl (E,F), and ZD7288 (F). (G,H) HCN currents recorded in NGF-treated PC12 cells. Note that the HCN currents were obviously smaller than that in NGF-untreated PC12 cells. Again, the currents were blocked or partially blocked by IVA, CsCl and ZD7288. The far right subpanels in panels (E–H) are the respective I–V curves which reflect the HCN current densities at different clamping voltage.