Skip to main content
. 1998 Dec 1;18(23):9620–9628. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.18-23-09620.1998

Table 1.

Comparison of experimental data on GLT-1 reversal potential with theoretical predictions for different stoichiometries

Theory
Experiments 3Na+, H+, glu/K+ 2Na+, H+, glu/K+ 3Na+, 2H+, glu/K+ 5Na+, H+, 2glu/K+
ControlErev −12.2  ± 1.6  (n = 22) −11.9  (p = 0.85) −54.1  (p = 9 × 10−18) −15.8  (p = 3 × 10−2) −27.1  (p = 3.9 × 10−9)
ΔErev(Δ[Na]o) −27.8  ± 2.5  (n = 7) −26.3  (p = 0.56) −35.1  (p = 2.6 × 10−2) −17.5  (p = 5.9 × 10−3) −29.2  (p = 0.59)
ΔErev(Δ[H]o) −19.3  ± 3.2  (n = 6) −17.7  (p = 0.66) −35.5  (p = 3.9 × 10−3) −23.6  (p = 0.23) −11.8  (p = 6.8 × 10−2)
ΔErev(Δ[K]o) +14.6  ± 2.6  (n = 11) +18.6  (p = 0.16) +37.1  (p = 6.4 × 10−6) +12.4  (p = 0.41) +12.4  (p = 0.41)
ΔErev(Δ[glu]o) +15.1  ± 1.6  (n = 7) +14.1  (p = 0.57) +28.2  (p = 2.1 × 10−4) +9.4  (p = 1.3 × 10−2) +18.8  (p = 6.5 × 10−2)

All reversal potentials are in millivolts. Data on the left give the mean reversal potential in control solution (±SEM; number of cells in brackets) and the reversal potential shifts seen on lowering [Na+]o from 101 to 51 mm, changing external pH from 7.4 to 8.0, lowering external [K+]o from 42.5 to 10 mm, and raising external [glu] from 100 to 300 μm. Columns on the right show the predicted reversal potentials for four different transporter stoichiometries (described as cotransported substrates/countertransported substrate). In brackets after each value is shown the p value from a two-tailedt test comparing the theoretical prediction with the experimental data.