← 专区目录
目录 · 跳到任一小节
生理学 · 朱涵专区 · 专题 01/03(课程主线,非本人论文)

静息电位与动作电位:生理学第一章的骨架

Kadir LA, Stacey M, Barrett-Jolley R. · Frontiers in Physiology 2018;9:1661 | 英文原题 Emerging Roles of the Membrane Potential: Action Beyond the Action Potential
下划线 = 中文容易“变味”或丢信息的英文术语:红线带编号 = 14 条注释卡(悬停看、点击跳转)。这一页是朱涵老师这门课(膜电位这一章)的主干整理;英文对照逐字取自上面那篇开放获取综述,不是她的论文——详情见下面的说明框。英文原文附于文末
先说清楚这页是什么。朱涵老师是生理学与神经生物学系的副教授,教了二十年生理学,但没有可公开检索的英文论文。所以这一页不是“论文精读”,而是她这门课的主干:静息电位和动作电位这一章,按国内生理学教材的通行讲法写成中文精讲。
每节末尾的「原文怎么说」逐字引自 Kadir、Stacey 与 Barrett-Jolley 2018 年发表在 Frontiers in Physiology 的开放获取综述(CC BY 授权),用来看“这些词在英文文献里长什么样”。请注意这篇综述的主题并不系统讲动作电位——它问的是“膜电位除了触发动作电位,还在别处干什么”。凡是它没讲到、而你必须会的(比如钠钾泵、跳跃式传导),我在正文里补写,并明确标注“这是教材内容,不是原文”。

先给你一张地图:这一章管着后面所有章

教材第一章讲膜电位,看上去只是电学小引子,其实它是后面每一章的语法:神经怎么传信号、肌肉怎么收缩、心脏为什么有自律性、肾小管怎么重吸收、β 细胞为什么按血糖释放胰岛素——全都要翻译成同一句话:某个通道开了,膜电位变了。

这一章真正要回答的是三个问题:① 一个没被刺激的细胞,为什么膜内外有电位差?② 刺激来了,这个电位差为什么会自己“炸”一下、又自己恢复?③ 这个“炸”怎么沿轴突跑出几厘米甚至一米?

难点不在名词,在两个反直觉的地方,你现在就该记住:

  • 静息电位不是“静止”的。它每秒都在烧 ATP——泵在搬离子、通道在漏离子,两者打平,才显得“不动”。所以“静息”描述的是稳态,不是休息。
  • 动作电位不是“电流沿轴突流过去”。它是在每一个位点被重新制造出来的。这个区别决定了你以后怎么理解传导速度、脱髓鞘和局麻药。
原文怎么说

“This is termed the RMP and is typically in the range of −10 to −100 mV.”

译:这被称为静息膜电位(RMP),其数值通常在 −10 到 −100 mV 之间。

注意原文写的是 typically in the range of——没有一个放之四海皆准的“−70 mV”。−70 只是多数神经元的常见值;软骨细胞、未分化细胞、甚至某些细胞是正值(原文后文就提到)。所以第一句话该问的不是“静息电位是多少”,而是“哪种细胞、在什么溶液里”。另:本页英文原句照抄原文的 markdown,上标保留 Ca^2+、K^+ 这种写法。

静息电位(一):K⁺ 平衡电位

先给定义:resting membrane potential(RMP,静息膜电位)是细胞未受刺激时膜内外的电位差,以膜外为参考,膜内为负。

要理解它,只需盯住两种力。第一种是浓度梯度:细胞内 K⁺ 高、细胞外低,K⁺ 想往外跑。第二种是电场:K⁺ 带正电,跑出去一点,膜外就变正、膜内变负,这个电场又把 K⁺ 往回拉。跑到某个程度,向外的化学驱动力和向内的电驱动力正好相等,K⁺ 的净跨膜电流为零——此时对应的膜电位,就叫 K⁺ 的equilibrium potential(平衡电位,记作 EK)。

它可以用Nernst equation(能斯特方程)算:E = 61.5 × log(Co/Ci) mV(37 ℃、一价离子;教材常把常数写成 61 或 60,C 是浓度)。取教材常引的近似值——细胞内 K⁺ 约 140 mmol/L、细胞外约 4.5 mmol/L——算出来 EK 约 −92 mV。这些浓度数值不同教材略有出入,你按自己那本记,但要知道它们是近似值。

这里有个必须分清的点:平衡电位是“算”出来的,静息电位是“测”出来的。考题问“某离子的平衡电位”与问“静息电位”,是两道不同的题。

原文怎么说

“whereby the Driving Force is [G × (RMP – ECa)] where G is conductance of the Ca^2+ entry pathway and ECa is equilibrium potential for Ca^2+ ions”

译:其中驱动力为 [G ×(RMP − ECa)],G 是 Ca²⁺ 内流通路的电导,ECa 是 Ca²⁺ 的平衡电位。

原文把平衡电位当“参照电压”用:驱动力 = 电导 ×(当前膜电位 − 该离子的平衡电位)。这个式子是整章的发动机——膜电位离某离子的平衡电位越远,推它跨膜流动的力越大。以后你看到任何“为什么这里 Ca²⁺ 进得去、那里进不去”,本质都是在算这个差。

静息电位(二):钠钾泵,以及“生电”这件事

钠钾泵(Na⁺/K⁺-ATPase)每水解一个 ATP,把 3 个 Na⁺ 泵出、2 个 K⁺ 泵入。它的作用要分成两层记,考试最容易只答一半:

  • 长期作用:维持梯度。梯度是 EK、ENa 存在的前提,梯度没了,静息电位也就没了。
  • 即时作用:直接生电。每循环净移出 1 个正电荷,使膜内更负,这叫electrogenic pump(生电性泵)。这部分对静息电位的直接贡献通常只有几毫伏(教材常写 2–4 mV 量级,不同细胞差别不小)。

怎么证明它“直接生电”?用哇巴因(ouabain)抑制泵,你会先看到一小段去极化——那就是生电成分消失了;再等下去,梯度慢慢耗散,去极化会更大。

原文怎么说

“The RMP is maintained by the cell’s compliment of ion channels.”

译:静息膜电位是由细胞所配备的整套离子通道维持的。

这是原文摘要里的一句。你会发现一个现象:这篇综述谈 RMP 时几乎只谈通道,泵基本被当成背景。这是现代文献的常见视角——通道决定“瞬间的电位”,泵负责“长期的梯度”。考试里泵仍是必考,别被文献的视角带偏。

原文怎么说

“Depolarising astrocytes with ouabain causes their increased proliferation and DNA synthesis”

译:用哇巴因使星形胶质细胞去极化,会导致其增殖和 DNA 合成增加。

这是原文里少数直接提到泵(通过抑制剂)的地方,而且它顺手演示了“改 RMP 就能改细胞行为”这条主线:抑制泵 → 去极化 → 增殖增加。注意它的因果是“去极化”,不是“没能量了”。

静息电位(三):真正决定数值的是“相对通透性”

如果膜只对 K⁺ 通透,静息电位就该等于 EK(约 −92 mV)。但实测多在 −70 mV 附近,为什么?因为膜对 Na⁺ 也有一点通透性——静息时 PNa/PK 很小(教材常引 0.02–0.05),但 Na⁺ 一直在往里漏,把膜电位往正的方向拖。膜对离子的这种“对谁通得多、对谁通得少”,就是differential permeability(差异通透性)——电位差的第一性原理。

所以静息电位落在 EK(约 −92 mV)与 ENa(约 +60 mV)之间,靠近 EK,因为静息时 K⁺ 的电导远大于 Na⁺ 的电导。定量算,用 Goldman–Hodgkin–Katz 方程(多离子版),或者更直观地用电导加权平均:

V ≈(gK·EK + gNa·ENa + gCl·ECl)/(gK + gNa + gCl)

把这句话记住,这一章就通了一半:静息电位是各离子平衡电位的“加权平均”,权重是各自的电导。任何一个通道的表达量或开放概率变了,权重就变,静息电位就动。那篇综述整篇讲的就是同一件事——只不过它讲的是可兴奋细胞之外的细胞。

原文怎么说

“demonstrating that it is maintained by the differential permeability of the plasma membrane to ions”

译:证明它是由质膜对离子的差异通透性所维持的。

differential 在这里是“有差别的、相对的”,不是数学的“微分”,也不是笼统的“不同”。膜对 K⁺、Na⁺、Cl⁻ 的通透性有差别,才产生电位差——这是整章的第一性原理。

原文怎么说

“For example, the voltage-gated KV1.6 (deriving from the KCNA6 gene) was found to be a strong contributor, by a steady-state activation that remained 5% open even at −90 mV”

译:例如,电压门控的 KV1.6(由 KCNA6 基因编码)被证明是一个重要贡献者:它的稳态激活使通道即使在 −90 mV 时仍有 5% 处于开放状态。

这句专门用来打掉一个错误直觉:“静息时通道是全关的”。不是。很多 K⁺ 通道在静息电位下仍有稳态开放概率(这里 5%),正是这些“漏”决定了 RMP。所以“静息”是动态平衡,不是所有门都关着。

动作电位:四个时相

动作电位是膜电位的一次快速、可逆、全或无的倒转。它的形状不是画出来的曲线,而是两条电流在时间上错开的结果:voltage-gated(电压门控)的 Na⁺ 通道先开、K⁺ 通道后到。

时相膜电位走向主要离子流通道状态(Nav / Kv)
去极化 depolarization由静息电位升到阈电位,再冲上去(上升支)Na⁺ 内流Nav 激活(m 门开、h 门尚开);Kv 还未充分开放
反极化(超射) overshoot膜内变正,接近 ENaNa⁺ 内流迅速减小Nav 开始失活;Kv 延迟整流开放
复极化 repolarization由正值回到静息电位(下降支)K⁺ 外流Nav 失活;Kv 大量开放
超极化(后超极化) afterhyperpolarization低于静息电位,再慢慢回来K⁺ 外流余波(+生电性泵)Kv 逐渐关闭;Nav 逐渐从失活中恢复

两个中文词要分清,很多人在这里混:反极化(overshoot)是膜内由负变正的那一段;超极化(hyperpolarization)是膜电位比静息电位更负。方向相反,别写反了。

还有一处细节值得你知道:峰值通常达不到 ENa(约 +60 mV),因为 Nav 失活得很快、Kv 同时打开把膜往回收。教材图上画的峰值多在 +20 到 +40 mV 一带,原因就在这里。

原文怎么说

“It rapidly entered dogma that the RMP was essentially a cocked-gun leaving excitable cells ready to fire depolarising action potentials.”

译:它很快成了一条教条:静息膜电位本质上是一把上了膛的枪,让可兴奋细胞随时准备打出一次去极化的动作电位。

cocked-gun(上了膛的枪)这个比喻值得记:它一句话说清了静息电位的功能——待发。整篇综述也正是在反驳“仅此而已”:非兴奋细胞没有枪,也一样有膜电位,而且靠它管增殖、分泌、体积、愈合。

阈电位与「全或无」

threshold(阈电位)是能触发再生性 Na⁺ 内流的临界膜电位,教材常引 −55 到 −50 mV。为什么会有“临界”这回事?因为这是一场正反馈和负反馈的拔河:Na⁺ 内流使膜去极化 → 更多 Nav 开放 → 更多 Na⁺ 内流(正反馈);同时 K⁺ 外流在把膜往回拉(负反馈)。刺激太小时 K⁺ 赢,膜回到静息;刺激够大时 Na⁺ 赢,膜冲上去。阈值就是“谁赢”的分界点。

all-or-none(全或无)说的是:同一细胞、同一条件下,单个动作电位的幅度不随刺激强度增大而增大。刺激强度改变的是频率和潜伏期,不是幅度。这是神经系统用频率而不是振幅编码信息的起点。

三个最常见的误用,你最好现在就改掉:

  • 把“全或无”套到整条神经或整块肌肉的收缩强度上。错。那是运动单位数目和放电频率的总和,不是全或无。
  • 以为“全或无”等于“传导中绝不衰减”。错。安全系数不够时,动作电位在传导途中可以衰减甚至阻滞(脱髓鞘就是这样)。
  • 以为阈下刺激“什么都没发生”。错。阈下刺激产生局部电位,只是不能触发动作电位——下一节就讲它。
原文怎么说

“The activation of K^+ ion channels for example, the K2P, causes the efflux of K^+ ions and hyperpolarization which brings the membrane potential to a value more negative than the threshold for activation of Ca^2+ channels.”

译:例如 K2P 这类 K⁺ 通道的激活会引起 K⁺ 外流和超极化,把膜电位带到比 Ca²⁺ 通道激活阈更负的水平。

原文这里的 threshold 是“Ca²⁺ 通道激活的阈”,不是动作电位的阈。同一个词,修饰对象不同,含义就不同——读文献时先看它后面跟的是哪个事件,别条件反射地当成“阈电位”。

原文怎么说

“Unlike skeletal and cardiac muscle, whose contraction depends on “all or nothing” action potentials, VSMs contraction typically depends on the RMP changes through the K^+ channel feedback loop mechanism to contract.”

译:与骨骼肌和心肌不同——后者的收缩依赖「全或无」的动作电位——血管平滑肌(VSM)的收缩通常依赖通过 K⁺ 通道反馈环路实现的静息膜电位变化。

这句是本页和 02 页(压力反射与血压)之间的接缝:骨骼肌和心肌靠动作电位收缩,血管平滑肌靠静息电位的水平调张力。所以后面讲血压时,可以完全不出现动作电位——这不是偷懒,是生理。

不应期:动作电位为什么不会倒着走

动作电位一旦产生,就会沿轴突单向传导,不会倒回去。这不是因为它讲礼貌,而是因为它身后那段膜还没恢复。

refractory period(不应期)分两段:

  • 绝对不应期:Nav 处于失活态,任何强度的刺激都发不出第二个动作电位。大致对应峰电位到复极化到约 −55 mV 这一段。
  • 相对不应期:一部分通道已从失活中恢复,但 K⁺ 电导仍高,需要阈上刺激才能引发动作电位。

它有三个功能,考试爱问“意义”就是这三条:① 决定最大放电频率(绝对不应期是多短,最高频率就是多高);② 保证单向传导;③ 把刺激强度编码成频率。

原文怎么说

“The mechanisms by which this occurs are counter intuitive to many people who would incorrectly see depolarisation of the RMP (when cells become less negative) as always excitatory and hyperpolarization of the RMP (when cells become more negative) as necessarily inhibitory.”

译:其机制对很多人来说是反直觉的:他们会错误地把 RMP 的去极化(细胞变得不那么负)一律看作兴奋,把 RMP 的超极化(细胞变得更负)一律看作抑制。

这是全页最值钱的一句。去极化 ≠ 兴奋,超极化 ≠ 抑制。原因有两层:一是兴奋性还取决于膜的总电导(见下一节的 input resistance);二是持续去极化会让 Nav 进入失活态,反而更不容易兴奋。

原文怎么说

“Furthermore, depolarisation of cells does not always lead to activation, in some instances; it can leave cells less excitable; for example, the voltage-gated ion channels that ordinarily underlie the action potentials become inactivated and are no longer available for activation.”

译:此外,细胞的去极化并不总是导致激活;在某些情况下,它反而使细胞更不容易兴奋:例如,平时构成动作电位基础的那些电压门控离子通道会进入失活状态,不再能被激活。

这句就是不应期的分子解释,也是“高钾血症为什么先兴奋后抑制”的答案。注意原文用的词是 inactivated(失活),不是“关闭”——它说的是通道暂时“不可再开”,而不是回到静息待命状态。

局部电位与动作电位:两套信号,两种用途

不是所有膜电位变化都叫动作电位。突触后膜上的 EPSP、终板电位、感受器电位,都是局部电位:等级性(幅度随刺激强度变)、随距离衰减(电紧张扩布,衰减到约 37% 处的距离叫长度常数 λ)、可以时间总和与空间总和、没有不应期。

局部电位动作电位
幅度等级性,随刺激强度变全或无
传播电紧张扩布,随距离衰减不衰减(在位点处再生),可长距离
总和可时间总和、空间总和不能总和(有不应期)
不应期无有(绝对期 + 相对期)
典型例子终板电位、EPSP/IPSP、感受器电位神经纤维、骨骼肌、心肌
功能整合、计算长距离传送

为什么要两套?因为“计算”需要分级、需要叠加、需要可正可负;“传送”需要不衰减、需要保真。树突和胞体做前者,轴突做后者。你在组会上听到的“整合”“总和”,说的都是局部电位这一套。

原文怎么说

“However, electrophysiology is very subtle, and the excitability of a nerve or muscle cell depends not only on the level of the membrane potential, but the overall conductance of the cell (the input resistance).”

译:然而,电生理学非常微妙:一条神经或一个肌细胞的兴奋性,不只取决于膜电位的水平,还取决于细胞的总电导(输入电阻)。

局部电位的算法核心就在这个 input resistance(输入电阻,Rin):ΔV = I × Rin。同样一个突触电流,Rin 大的细胞(小细胞、通道少)电位变化更大,更容易到阈。这就是为什么小神经元里一个 EPSP 就够触发动作电位,而大运动神经元需要很多个 EPSP 总和。

传导:连续传导与跳跃式传导

先讲机制,再讲两种纤维的差别。局部电流学说是这样:兴奋区(膜内正、膜外负)与邻近未兴奋区(膜内负、膜外正)之间存在电位差,产生局部电流,使邻近段的膜去极化;一旦到阈,那里就产生一个新的动作电位。然后这个过程一段一段往前推。

连续传导跳跃式传导
纤维无髓纤维有髓纤维
机制相邻位点依次去极化到阈,逐点产生动作电位局部电流在结间快速扩布,兴奋只在郎飞结处再生
速度慢(教材常引 0.5–2 m/s 量级)快(Aα 纤维可达 70–120 m/s 量级)
耗能高(每个位点都要重新泵离子恢复梯度)低(需要“重新点火”的位点少得多)
易损性局麻药、缺氧时最先失去传导(细的无髓纤维如 C 类)脱髓鞘(多发性硬化、吉兰–巴雷综合征)时减慢或阻滞

速度取决于三件事:纤维直径、髓鞘是否完整、温度。这三条你以后在临床上都会遇到:糖尿病周围神经病变、压迫性神经损伤、低温麻醉,本质都在动这三个变量。

原文怎么说

“characterized in detail how rapid changes in membrane ion permeabilities lead to a regenerating action potential in nerves”

译:详细刻画了膜离子通透性的快速变化,如何在神经中产生一个「再生性」的动作电位。

关键词是 regenerating(再生性)。中文一个“传”字把机制抹平了:动作电位不是被传过去的能量,而是在每个位点重新生成。所以“传导速度”其实是“每一段膜重新点火所需时间的总和”。

说明:这篇综述没有讨论saltatory conduction(跳跃式传导)——它的主题是可兴奋细胞之外。下列术语属于教材范围,挂在这里是给你查英文文献用。

这个专题和考试/实验的关系

先说考试。这一章的题几乎都能归成四类:

  • 图形题:给一条动作电位曲线,标时相、写离子流、写通道状态。上面那张四时相表就是答案。
  • 计算题:Nernst 方程算单离子平衡电位;GHK 方程算多离子静息电位。注意常数用 61 还是 58(取决于温度)、对数是 log 还是 ln、阴离子的符号要反过来。
  • 判断题:超极化一定等于抑制吗?阈下刺激真的什么都没发生吗?全或无适用于整块肌肉吗?三个都答“不”。
  • 临床联系题:高钾血症时静息电位去极化,接近阈电位使兴奋性先升高;血钾进一步升高,Nav 大量失活,兴奋性反而降低——这是经典的双相变化。低钾则超极化,兴奋性降低。

再说实验。你在组里最可能遇到的记录手段是膜片钳(patch clamp):电流钳(current clamp)记静息电位和动作电位,电压钳(voltage clamp)记通道电流,单通道记录看单个通道的开闭。原文参考文献里就有 Neher 与 Sakmann 1976 年的工作——单通道记录的开端,后来的诺贝尔奖。

如果你真去记静息电位,有几个坑要知道:破膜后的液接电位、串联电阻、浴液温度、细胞外液 K⁺ 浓度(从 5 改成 2.5 mmol/L,静息电位就超极化几毫伏)。所以看文献别只看“RMP = −70 mV”这个数,先看 Methods 里怎么测的。

最后说药物。这一章是药理学的入口,因为几乎所有作用于电信号的药,靶点都落在电压门控通道或配体门控通道上:局麻药阻断 Nav,让动作电位既不能产生也不能传导;抗癫痫药稳定 Nav 的失活态;钙通道阻滞剂(如维拉帕米)阻断 L 型 Cav;磺脲类降糖药关闭 β 细胞的 KATP 通道;而 hERG(Kv11.1)被阻断会延长 QT 间期——这是很多新药在临床前就被淘汰的原因。

原文怎么说

“When the blood glucose levels rise, there is an increase in the ATP concentration and a decrease in the ADP concentration which causes the KATP channels to close and the cell’s membrane to become depolarised leading to Ca^2+ influx and therefore insulin release.”

译:当血糖水平升高时,ATP 浓度上升、ADP 浓度下降,这使 KATP 通道关闭、细胞膜去极化,导致 Ca²⁺ 内流,从而释放胰岛素。

这一句就是“膜电位控制分泌”的标准范例:血糖 → ATP/ADP 比值 → KATP(ATP 敏感性 K⁺ 通道) → 静息电位 → Ca²⁺ 内流 → 胰岛素释放。读懂这一句,磺脲类为什么降糖、为什么会有低血糖风险,你自己就能推出来。

原文怎么说

“Ion channels are good therapeutic targets”
“however, the RMP is influenced by multiple channels and so it is possible that different combinations of ion channel modulating drugs and biologics may be required to effectively change a given RMP.”

译:离子通道是很好的治疗靶点。然而,静息膜电位受多种通道共同影响,因此要有效改变某一给定的静息电位,可能需要不同的离子通道调节药物与生物制剂组合。

原文这句提醒很重要,也解释了为什么“找到靶点”和“做出药”之间差得远:RMP 是加权平均,关掉一个通道,其他通道会把它拉回来。原文在同一段还说:“mutations in the ion channels that contribute to the RMP can have detrimental effects that lead to disease”(参与构成 RMP 的离子通道若发生突变,可产生导致疾病的有害效应)。

给刚进组的你

我没有朱涵老师的课堂录音,所以下面这几条不是她的原话,而是这门课一贯的要求——也是她这类教了二十年、参编过三部生理学教材的老师最常盯的地方。

一、别只背结论。这一章每一个结论都能还原成一个实验:枪乌贼巨轴突、电压钳、膜片钳。背“静息电位是 −70 mV”没用,要能说出这个数是在哪种细胞、哪种溶液、什么温度下测的。她考你“为什么”,其实是在考你有没有把结论和实验对上号。

二、学会问“是哪一种通道”。以后你看任何电生理文献,Methods 里一定有一句细胞外液成分。K⁺ 从 5 改到 2.5 mmol/L,静息电位就超极化几毫伏——很多所谓“表型”,来源就在这里。

三、下次组会问师姐三个问题:组里有没有膜片钳、用的是哪台放大器;我们做的模型细胞静息电位大概多少;有没有人做过动作电位记录。这三个问题一个星期内就能让你知道自己在什么平台上工作,比读十篇综述都实在。

四、读文献的顺序改一下:先看图 1(机制示意图),再看 Methods 里电生理那一段,最后才看结果里的代表性 trace。你现在读得慢,多半是因为从摘要硬啃。

最后一句:这门课看着“背得多”,其实考点集中在一条因果链上——通道状态 → 电导 → 膜电位 → 效应。把这条链写在一张纸上,比抄十页笔记有用。


▲ 术语与翻译难点(对照学习用)

〔注1〕
原文
resting membrane potential (RMP)
直译
静息膜电位
失味点
“静息”两个字最骗人:它不表示膜在休息、不耗能,而是“离子流打平”的动态稳态——泵在烧 ATP、通道在漏,两者速率相等,才显出电位不变。英文 resting 也只是“未受刺激”的意思,不含“不活动”。
学习提示
看到 RMP 先问三件事:什么细胞、什么细胞外液、什么温度。原文自己说范围是 −10 到 −100 mV,−70 只是常见值。
〔注2〕
原文
equilibrium potential(原文写作 ECa)
直译
平衡电位
失味点
中文“平衡”容易被读成“电荷中和、电位为零”。恰恰相反:平衡电位是该离子净电流为零时对应的膜电位,它一般不是 0 mV(K⁺ 约 −92,Na⁺ 约 +60)。此刻膜内外电荷并不相等,只是电场力与浓度梯度刚好抵消。
学习提示
平衡电位是算出来的(Nernst),静息电位是测出来的。考题问“某离子平衡电位”和问“静息电位”是两件事。
〔注3〕
原文
Nernst equation
直译
能斯特方程
失味点
它只描述“一种离子”的平衡电位。中文复习资料常把它直接当成“静息电位的公式”,这是错的:静息电位由多种离子的相对通透性共同决定,要用 Goldman–Hodgkin–Katz 方程或电导加权平均。
学习提示
记住常数:37 ℃、一价离子时 2.303RT/F ≈ 61.5 mV,写成 E = 61.5·log(Co/Ci)(C 为浓度)。对阴离子(Cl⁻)符号要反过来。
〔注4〕
原文
electrogenic pump
直译
生电性泵
失味点
“生电”容易被理解成“发电”或“产生电流”。其实它不发电:每循环净移出 1 个正电荷(3 Na⁺ 出、2 K⁺ 入),使膜内多一个负电荷,因而对静息电位有直接贡献(通常几毫伏)。这个贡献小,但它是“泵不只是维持梯度”的证据。
学习提示
考“泵对静息电位的贡献”要答两层:即时生电(几 mV)+长期维持梯度(决定性)。用哇巴因抑制泵,先看到的小幅去极化就是生电成分消失。
〔注5〕
原文
differential permeability
直译
差异通透性/有差别的通透性
失味点
differential 在这里是“有差别的、相对的”,不是数学的“微分”,也不是笼统的“不同的”——后者会丢掉“比值”这层意思。原文用它解释静息电位的来源:膜对不同离子通透性的差别,才是电位差的来源。
学习提示
记成“通透性之比”:静息时 PNa/PK 很小(教材常引 0.02–0.05),所以静息电位靠近 EK 而不靠近 ENa。
〔注6〕
原文
voltage-gated
直译
电压门控的
失味点
别只译成“电压依赖的”——那样会丢掉“门”(gate):通道有一个由膜电位推动的构象开关。丢掉“门”,你就想不到“门可以被药物卡住”,也就想不到局麻药、抗癫痫药的作用点在哪。
学习提示
看到 voltage-gated 就问两个数:半激活电压(V½)和失活曲线。原文这句里 KV1.6 在 −90 mV 还有 5% 开放,说明“静息时通道全关”是错的。
〔注7〕
原文
threshold
直译
阈/阈值/阈电位
失味点
中文“阈值”默认指刺激强度,但电生理里 threshold 大多指“膜电位达到某个水平”。原文这句的 threshold 是“Ca²⁺ 通道激活的阈”,既不是动作电位的阈,也不是刺激强度的阈。同一个词,修饰对象不同,含义就不同。
学习提示
读文献看到 threshold,先找它后面跟的是哪个通道、哪个事件,再决定译成“阈电位”还是“阈值”。
〔注8〕
原文
all or nothing(原文无连字符)
直译
全或无
失味点
它说的是“同一细胞、同一条件下,单个动作电位的幅度不随刺激强度增大而增大”,不是“要么有反应要么没反应”。更大的误用是把它套到整块肌肉或整条神经的收缩强度上:那是运动单位数目和放电频率的总和。
学习提示
在这一层,刺激强度被编码成“频率”而不是“幅度”。这是神经系统用频率传递信息的起点。
〔注9〕
原文
refractory period
直译
不应期
失味点
“不应”听起来像“细胞累了、不想理你”。机制不是疲劳,而是 Na⁺ 通道处于失活态(h 门关闭),必须等复极化才能解除——所以绝对不应期内,给多强的刺激都发不出第二个动作电位。
学习提示
本页引的综述没有直接用 refractory period 这个词,但它用 “inactivated … no longer available for activation” 描述的正是这件事(见注10)。这不矛盾:教材给名字,文献讲机制。
〔注10〕
原文
inactivated
直译
失活的
失味点
“失活”(inactivation)和“关闭”(deactivation/closure)不是一回事。关闭是通道回到静息态、随时可再开;失活是被一个“塞子”(h 门/失活颗粒)堵住,必须复极化才解除。混淆这两个词,你就解释不了为什么有不应期、为什么传导是单向的。
学习提示
Na⁺ 通道三个状态:静息(可开)→ 开放 → 失活(不可开)→ 复极化后回静息。画成三态循环图,比背文字有用。
〔注11〕
原文
input resistance
直译
输入电阻
失味点
中文电生理常说“输入阻抗”,但这里是纯电阻概念:Rin = ΔV/ΔI,衡量“同样大小的电流注入能把膜电位推动多少”。Rin 大(细胞小、通道少)→ 同样的突触电流引起更大的去极化。
学习提示
这就是为什么小神经元里一个 EPSP 更容易到阈。原文把这句放在“去极化不一定兴奋”的论证里,逻辑是:兴奋性 = 膜电位水平 + 总电导。
〔注12〕
原文
saltatory conduction
直译
跳跃式传导
失味点
saltatory 来自拉丁语 saltare(跳)。中文“跳跃”容易让人以为“电流跳过了髓鞘段”;实际是髓鞘段几乎不产生兴奋,局部电流在结间快速扩布,兴奋只在郎飞结处重新点火。所以快的真正原因不是“少走路”,而是“少点火”——需要重新产生动作电位的位点少得多,也更省 ATP。
学习提示
本页引的综述没有讨论跳跃式传导(它讲可兴奋细胞之外),这个词属于教材范围,挂在这里是给你查英文文献用。
〔注13〕
原文
regenerating action potential
直译
再生性动作电位
失味点
中文习惯说“传导”,一个“传”字把机制抹平了:动作电位不是被传过去的能量,而是在每个位点由局部电流重新触发、重新生成。丢掉 regenerating,你就会把轴突想成电线,也就理解不了脱髓鞘为什么是“阻滞”而不只是“慢一点”,以及局麻药为什么能让一段轴突沉默。
学习提示
传导速度 = 单位长度上“重新点火”所需时间的总和,所以它取决于通道密度、纤维直径、髓鞘和温度。
〔注14〕
原文
KATP(ATP 敏感性 K⁺ 通道)
直译
ATP 敏感性钾通道
失味点
名字里的 ATP 说的是“敏感性”,不是“ATP 酶”,它不水解 ATP。方向也别记反:β 细胞里细胞内 ATP 升高 → 通道关闭 → 去极化 → 分泌增加。很多复习资料写成“ATP 打开 KATP”,正好反了。
学习提示
这是“膜电位控制分泌”的标准范例:血糖 → ATP/ADP 比值 → KATP 开闭 → 静息电位 → Ca²⁺ 内流 → 胰岛素释放。磺脲类降糖药就是直接关这个通道。

附录 · 英文原文

以下为未经改动的英文原文(来源:Frontiers in Physiology / Europe PMC 开放获取全文,CC BY 授权)。这篇综述的作者是 Lina Abdul Kadir、Michael Stacey、Richard Barrett-Jolley,不是朱涵老师;本页正文的中文精讲也不是该文的译文,而是课程主线整理。

Emerging Roles of the Membrane Potential: Action Beyond the Action Potential

Journal: 2018;9():1661  |  DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2018.01661  |  PMID: 30519193  |  PMCID:

Authors: Lina Abdul Kadir; Michael Stacey; Richard Barrett-Jolley

Abstract

Whilst the phenomenon of an electrical resting membrane potential (RMP) is a central tenet of biology, it is nearly always discussed as a phenomenon that facilitates the propagation of action potentials in excitable tissue, muscle, and nerve. However, as ion channel research shifts beyond these tissues, it became clear that the RMP is a feature of virtually all cells studied. The RMP is maintained by the cell’s compliment of ion channels. Transcriptome sequencing is increasingly revealing that equally rich compliments of ion channels exist in both excitable and non-excitable tissue. In this review, we discuss a range of critical roles that the RMP has in a variety of cell types beyond the action potential. Whereas most biologists would perceive that the RMP is primarily about excitability, the data show that in fact excitability is only a small part of it. Emerging evidence show that a dynamic membrane potential is critical for many other processes including cell cycle, cell-volume control, proliferation, muscle contraction (even in the absence of an action potential), and wound healing. Modulation of the RMP is therefore a potential target for many new drugs targeting a range of diseases and biological functions from cancer through to wound healing and is likely to be key to the development of successful stem cell therapies.

Keywords: ion channels, membrane potential, resting membrane potential, proliferation, stem cells, cancer, neurons, blood pressure

Introduction

The fact that cells have a transmembrane potential has been known for over a 100 years, with earlier experiments by [Hober (1905)] establishing the observation, and [Curtis and Cole (1942)] and others demonstrating that it is maintained by the differential permeability of the plasma membrane to ions. This is termed the RMP and is typically in the range of −10 to −100 mV. The Nobel Prize break-through work by [Hodgkin and Huxley (1952b)] characterized in detail how rapid changes in membrane ion permeabilities lead to a regenerating action potential in nerves. This work was then refined and extended to describe the propagation of action potentials in other excitable tissues such as skeletal muscle and cardiac muscle ([Neher and Sakmann, 1976]). It rapidly entered dogma that the RMP was essentially a cocked-gun leaving excitable cells ready to fire depolarising action potentials. In nerve, clearly this serves the purpose of transmitting signals along their length from one part of the animal to another, whereas in skeletal and cardiac muscle it was hypothesized to spread the excitation signal throughout the tissue and was ultimately coupled to the elevation of intracellular Ca2+ and the excitation-contraction coupling. But what of non-excitable tissues? Most cells in an animal still have a dynamic membrane potential despite not having an action potential firing phenotype. Therefore, the role of the membrane potential is more enigmatic. Initial speculation could be that such non-excitable cell membrane potentials are an accident of evolution, however, detailed analysis of the literature shows that the membrane potential sub-serves a large range of essential biological functions (Table). In each case, relatively subtle differences in ion channel expression leave cells with quite distinct membrane potential properties; both in terms of level and potential for its modulation. The mechanisms, and ion channels controlling the RMP are vast and beyond the scope of this short review, so we focus instead on a range of distinct roles that the RMP plays across a selection of excitable and non-excitable cell types in a range of systems.

[Table 1] Different functions and the cell types associated with these functions that are regulated by the RMP are shown.

FunctionCell typeReference
Circadian rhythmNeurones[Belle et al., 2009]
Fibroblast[Noguchi et al., 2012]
Biological sensingNeurones[Feetham et al., 2015b]
ContractilityVascular smooth muscle cells[Nelson and Quayle, 1995]
Myofibroblasts[Chilton et al., 2005]
HearingCochlea outer hair cells[Ashmore, 2008]
Volume controlChondrocytes[Lewis et al., 2011a]
Retinal Muller cells[Netti et al., 2017]
SecretionPancreatic β cells[Aguilar-Bryan and Bryan, 1999]; [Lin et al., 2005]
ProliferationVascular smooth muscle cells[Nelson and Quayle, 1995]
Stem cells[Messenger and Warner, 1979]
Cancer cells[Wonderlin et al., 1995]
Cell cycleT-cells[Amigorena et al., 1990]
B-cells[Neher and Sakmann, 1976]
Cancer progressionMelanocytes[Chernet and Levin, 2013a],[b]; [Blackiston et al., 2011]
Migration and wound healingCorneal epithelial cells[Reid and Zhao, 2014]; [Chifflet et al., 2005]
Skin keratinocytes[Nuccitelli, 2003]
PigmentationSkin melanocytes[Bellono et al., 2013]
Uveal melanocytes[Hodgkin and Huxley, 1952b]
Retinal pigment epithelium (RPE)[Cone and Tongier, 1973]

Circadian Rhythm

Circadian rhythm is the term used to describe a range of biological processes that change in a daily 24-h cycle. One of the key master controllers is the master clock located in the SCN of the hypothalamus which coordinates the circadian pattern ([Reppert and Weaver, 2002]). The neuronal firing frequency changes with a daily cycle and thus leads to cyclic changes in the melatonin secretion from the pineal gland. Melatonin, in turn, modulates a range of biological processes (such as sleep) via interaction with the melatonin MT1/2 G-protein coupled receptors ([Dubocovich, 2007]). One of the fundamental signals mediating the circadian firing cycles of SCN neurones is change in the RMP. The mechanisms by which this occurs are counter intuitive to many people who would incorrectly see depolarisation of the RMP (when cells become less negative) as always excitatory and hyperpolarization of the RMP (when cells become more negative) as necessarily inhibitory. The earliest work on the RMP involved skeletal muscle and the squid giant axon since they are physically large enough to allow penetration with a recording electrode coupled to a Galvanometer adapted to measure small voltages ([Hodgkin and Huxley, 1952b]). In the early experiments, it became evident that small depolarisations led to the activation of action potentials. Therefore, intuitively small hyperpolarizations move cells further away from the trigger point and render cells less excitable (or inhibited). However, electrophysiology is very subtle, and the excitability of a nerve or muscle cell depends not only on the level of the membrane potential, but the overall conductance of the cell (the input resistance). Furthermore, depolarisation of cells does not always lead to activation, in some instances; it can leave cells less excitable; for example, the voltage-gated ion channels that ordinarily underlie the action potentials become inactivated and are no longer available for activation. This is how the firing frequency of neurones is regulated in the SCN. Under control of the Per1 clock-gene, large and small Ca2+-activated K+ channel conductance is decreased in the afternoon, leading to a profound depolarisation of the RMP and a cessation of action potential firing in excitable cells ([Belle et al., 2009]).

Since many other cell types exhibit circadian cycling of clock gene expression, and consequent changes in cellular activity, it is intriguing to know if they too are associated with changes in the RMP. Fibroblasts are one such example of peripheral, non-excitable cells that display changes in RMP that follow a circadian cycle. It is not entirely clear why these cells do this, however, one hypothesis is that it is to adapt these cells to the small systemic changes in body temperature that occur throughout the day ([Izumo et al., 2003]). Whilst no direct RMP measurements have been made, ion channel blockers eliminate daily cycling of clock gene expression ([Noguchi et al., 2012]). The observation that the membrane potential of fibroblasts displays a circadian variation is consistent with the possibility that it plays an important role in non-excitable cells.

Biological Sensing

Many cells have the constitutive ability to detect and respond to changes in their environment. In recent years, it has been clear that transient receptor potential (TRP) channels commonly underlie this behavior ([Guilak et al., 1994]; [Clapham, 2003]). In the case of neurones, our own studies have shown that neurones within the PVN respond to osmolality changes modulated by hypotonic saline which leads to the hyperpolarization of the membrane potential, which in turn reduces their firing frequency ([Feetham et al., 2015b]) and thus, ultimately control the blood pressure ([Feetham et al., 2015a]). In both of the systems above, and in other tissues including VSM ([Nilius and Droogmans, 2001]), a common mechanism appears to be a feedback loop, where Ca2+ increase activates Ca2+-activated K+ channels which hyperpolarize the plasma membrane and thus increase the driving force (voltage) for further Ca2+ entry (whereby the Driving Force is [G × (RMP – ECa)] where G is conductance of the Ca2+ entry pathway and ECa is equilibrium potential for Ca2+ ions). This in turn increases the activation of Ca2+-activated K+ channels and enables the feedback loop to continue. We were able to simulate this numerically in the case of the PVN neurones ([Feetham et al., 2018]). We demonstrated that the Ca2+ elevation appears to be mediated by TRPV4 channels, and that the small-conductance Ca2+-activated K+ channels (SK channels) mediate a hyperpolarization that both increases intracellular Ca2+ and decreases their action potential firing frequency ([Feetham et al., 2015b]). Similar mechanisms are likely to be involved with the control of many other cell types, yet this phenomenon is best characterized in VSM (see below).

Contractility

Despite many being non-excitable, smooth muscle cells are heavily dependent on their RMP for control of contraction. Some of the best-studied cells are vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMs) as they have considerable plasticity in their phenotype. They have the ability to change phenotype depending on their microenvironment from contractile cells to non-contractile cells and vice versa ([Frid et al., 1997]). VSMs function to drive the contraction of the vascular wall and regulate the luminal diameter and vascular tone. Unlike skeletal and cardiac muscle, whose contraction depends on “all or nothing” action potentials, VSMs contraction typically depends on the RMP changes through the K+ channel feedback loop mechanism to contract. The activation of K+ ion channels for example, the K2P, causes the efflux of K+ ions and hyperpolarization which brings the membrane potential to a value more negative than the threshold for activation of Ca2+ channels. This results in decreased Ca2+ influx, leading to the relaxation of the VSM and hence vasodilation ([Nelson and Quayle, 1995]). On the other hand, the inhibition of K2P channels leads to the depolarisation of the membrane potential and the contraction of smooth muscle cells ([Nelson and Quayle, 1995]). Other non-excitable cell types that contract due to changes in the RMP include myofibroblasts and ventricular fibroblasts ([Chilton et al., 2005]). The myocardium is composed of different cell types. Cardiac myocytes occupy only a third of the cells in the cardiac myocardium; the remaining non-myocyte cells are mainly endothelial cells, VSMs and fibroblasts ([Brilla et al., 1995]). In myocardial injury, an immune response is generated, which results in the recruitment of fibroblasts which proliferate and transform into myofibroblasts ([Frangogiannis et al., 2002]; [Tomasek et al., 2002]). These myofibroblasts show similar characteristics to fibroblasts as they also proliferate and migrate and synthesize various autocrine and/or paracrine factors ([Sun and Weber, 2003]). Increasing the extracellular K+ ion concentration of ventricular fibroblasts leads to increase in the K+ channel activity of inwardly rectifying channels (Kir). This results in the depolarisation of the membrane potential and enhances the contractility of the fibroblasts ([Chilton et al., 2005]). The role of the membrane potential in contraction is crucial. One such example mentioned above is its modulation of the contraction of VSMs, since failure of the VSMs to contract can lead to detrimental effects in the blood flow to the heart. Perhaps, this explains why there are many ion channels that maintain the RMP as the heart’s change in metabolic demand needs to be met promptly and accurately.

Hearing and the Mammalian Cochlear

The electromechanics of the cochlea are driven by the hair cell RMP (reviewed by [Ashmore, 2008]). The cochlea outer hair cells play a key role in sound amplification and fine frequency selectivity that works via two interrelated mechanisms: somatic electromotility ([Brownell, 2017]) and the active hair bundle ([Harland et al., 2015]). The cochlea of the mammalian inner ear is filled with two different extracellular solutions, the perilymph and endolymph, separated from each other by hair cells. The perilymph solution is composed of a “typical” interstitial fluid of 5 mM K+ and 150 mM Na+. Conversely, the endolymph solution is an atypical extracellular solution, composed of high K+ and low Na+ (150 mM K+ and 5 mM Na+) as well as 20 μM Ca2+ ([Nin et al., 2016]) as shown in Figure, and conveys an endocochlear potential of +80 mV. The outer hair cells expose cilia from their apical surface to the endolymph; this creates a very large electrochemical driving force for K+ entry and allows a relatively small mechanical (acoustic) activation of the KCNQ1/KCNE1 K+ channels to carry a massive entry of K+ ions into the hair cells, which in turn depolarizes the cell membrane. Influx of Ca2+ ions simultaneously occurs and contributes to establishing the dynamic ranges of hearing. The positive endocochlear potential, coupled to the hair cell RMP of ∼−45 mV contributes to finely tuned hearing profiles, and results in deafness when lost. This is the case with certain forms of albino associated congenital deafness, where there is an absence of the KCNJ10 expressing melanocytes (synonymous with intermediate cells) in the stria vascularis. This leads to a loss of the high endocochlear K+ concentration and an inadequate ionic driving force for K+ entry ([Ryugo and Menotti-Raymond, 2012]).

[FIGURE 1] Apparent correlation between the RMP and proliferative potential of cells. The RMP of tumor and non-tumor cells and their proliferation potential are shown. Modified with permission from the copyright holders [Yang and Brackenbury (2013)].

In order to maintain the endocochlear potential, a K+ circuit is present; K+ entering the hair cell at the apical end is transported through the cell and exits into the perilymph. From here K+ is unidirectionally transported through the syncytial layer and into the Intrastrial Fluid (IF) before being actively transported by cells of the marginal layer back into the endolymph. The positive RMP of the syncytial layer (0 to ∼ +5 mV) ([Nin et al., 2016]) is critical for harvesting the K+ diffusion potential on the apical surface to set the intrastrial space potential and endocochlear potential to a highly positive value, which is essential for hearing (Figure). The syncytial basolateral surface is mainly provided by fibrocytes in the spiral ligament. In spite of the physiological importance of fibrocytes, the machinery underlying the establishment of this unique RMP have not yet been fully characterized. Currently, it is believed that changes in the membrane potential cause the transfer of an electrical charge inside the cell membrane resulting in conformational changes in prestin, a member of the SLC26 anion exchanger family, which induces conformational rearrangements in response to intracellular Cl− concentrations and leads to morphological changes to the cell length. The complexities of the cochlea provides an excellent example of different yet distinct roles of the RMP in a functioning non-excitable tissue.

[FIGURE 2] The electrochemical profile of the cochlea. (A) The structure of the human ear and a cross-section of the cochlea are illustrated in the upper panel. The tissue and cellular composition of the cochlea are illustrated in the lower panel; this shows the electrochemical properties of the endolymph and perilymph and the possible circulation of K+ ions between them. The boxed region in the lower panel is shown in (B). (B) Structural and cellular composition of the lateral wall of the cochlea depicting key ion channels and transporters that are thought to maintain the unidirectional K+ transport across the lateral wall and the endocochlear potential (EP) they produce are shown. (C) Membrane potential and [K+] of the lateral wall under physiological conditions. The top panel displays the membrane potential and [K+] averaged from multiple measurements. The membrane potential across the basolateral and apical surfaces of the syncytial layer, vSB and vSA, respectively, and the basolateral and apical surfaces of the marginal cell layer, vMB and vMA, respectively, are shown. The lower panel shows a representative trace of the measurement of the membrane potential and the [K+] in the cochlea of a live guinea pig. [Reproduced and modified with permission from the copyright holders the National Academy of Sciences ([Nin et al., 2008]) and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg ([Yoshida et al., 2016])].

Volume Control

In all cells, maintenance of cell volume is essential for survival. The membrane potential is likely to be a key regulator of this process in many cells, although, to date this has only been demonstrated explicitly in a few cell types including: cardiomyocytes, retinal Muller cells, and chondrocytes ([Lewis et al., 2011a]; [Cha and Noma, 2012]; [Fernández et al., 2013]). Active control of cell volume is especially true of chondrocytes, since they exist in an environment with constantly changing osmolality and compressive loads ([Wilkins et al., 2000]). The membrane potential feeds into the cell volume control mechanism by changing the “driving force” for ionic fluxes. In this context, the ion channels, especially those selective for K+, are behaving as “osmolyte” channels ([Kerrigan and Hall, 2000]) rather than simply maintaining the RMP as expected from dogma. We have demonstrated that in chondrocytes the maintenance of the RMP is heavily dependent on TRP channels, with TRPV5 being a key player ([Lewis et al., 2011a]), although there are still clear species-dependent contributions from other K+ channels. For example, the voltage-gated KV1.6 (deriving from the KCNA6 gene) was found to be a strong contributor, by a steady-state activation that remained 5% open even at −90 mV ([Clark et al., 2010]). Further work by the same group revealed that a major additional contribution to the RMP of human articular chondrocytes was provided by the TASK-2 two-pore domain K+ channel conferring, in particular, pH sensitivity ([Clark et al., 2011]). Our own examination of the chondrocyte RMP over many years across different species indicates that it is less negative than published for most other cell types. We proposed that the diverse compliment of chondrocyte ion channels in both articular ([Barrett-Jolley et al., 2010]) and costal cartilage ([Asmar et al., 2016]) contributes to this relatively positive RMP in chondrocytes and facilitates volume control as an adaptation to the extreme osmotic challenges these cells routinely face ([Lewis et al., 2011b]). Our data support this as they show that at negative membrane potentials chondrocytes appear to be unable to decrease their volume when exposed to higher osmotic potential solutions, i.e., cell shrinkage was slower or non-existent ([Lewis et al., 2011a]). This mechanism seems closely paralleled to that reported more recently for Muller cells ([Fernández et al., 2013]; [Netti et al., 2017]). These are a type of glial cell that supports the local homeostasis of the retina. Functionally they are thought to be quite similar to astrocytes found elsewhere in the CNS and this implies wider importance of the RMP/cell volume links throughout the CNS. [Fernández et al. (2013)] used potentiometric dyes rather than sharp electrodes, but were able to model a close relationship between the RMP and regulatory volume decrease in terms of both magnitude and kinetics of response. Further studies by the same group ([Netti et al., 2017]) show that TRPV4 is a key player in this process, again functionally coupling to Ca2+-activated K+ channels. This data indicates that the optimal RMP is unique to different types of cells depending on their function and environment; hence its maintenance is crucial for cell survival.

Secretion

One of the most extravagantly studied secretory mechanisms is the pancreatic β-cell insulin secretion system. This system has membrane potential level control of secretion and is perhaps a model of secretion that is more widely known. β-cells express ATP-sensitive K+ (KATP) channels; that is, Kir that close in response to elevation of intracellular ATP ([Aguilar-Bryan and Bryan, 1999]). These KATP channels play a key role in the glucose-stimulated insulin release in pancreatic β-cells ([Ashcroft et al., 1984]; [Ashcroft and Rorsman, 1990]). When the blood glucose levels rise, there is an increase in the ATP concentration and a decrease in the ADP concentration which causes the KATP channels to close and the cell’s membrane to become depolarised leading to Ca2+ influx and therefore insulin release. On the other hand, when the blood glucose levels fall, ATP concentration decrease leading to the opening of the KATP channels, membrane hyperpolarization and the termination of insulin secretion. The route of Ca2+ influx is not entirely clear, but several Ca2+ channel α-subunits have been identified in pancreatic β-cells including CaV1.2, CaV1.3, CaV2.1, CaV2.2, CaV2.3, and CaV3.1, have been identified in pancreatic beta-cells and mutations of CaV1.3 and CaV2.1 channels are seen in subgroups of diabetic patients ([Yang and Berggren, 2006]). The KATP channels can also regulate the insulin release through their interaction with phosphoinositides in particular with PIP2 which stimulates KATP channels by decreasing their sensitivity to ATP, causing the cells to become more hyperpolarized and not secrete insulin properly when glucose levels are high ([Lin et al., 2005]). This highlights the importance of the RMP as mutations in the ion channels that contribute to the RMP can have detrimental effects that lead to disease.

Proliferation

The RMP in excitable and non-excitable cells usually varies in a wide range from −10 to −100 mV. It has been postulated that where cells fall on this scale corresponds to their proliferative potential (Figure; [Binggeli and Weinstein, 1986]). For example, cells that have membrane potentials that are hyperpolarized tend to be quiescent and do not usually undergo mitosis; whereas cells that have depolarised membrane potentials tend to be proliferative and usually mitotically active ([Cone, 1971]). However, this is not always the case as each cell type is different and expresses different ion channels. The membrane potential is highly correlated with mitosis, DNA synthesis, cell cycle progression and overall proliferation in general ([Cone, 1971]; [Binggeli and Weinstein, 1986]). The relationship between the RMP and cells’ proliferation levels could be taken advantage of, to manipulate the cells’ mitosis and increase their proliferation when desired ([Cone, 1971]). Several studies have shown that changing the membrane potential of a particular cell can drive changes in the cell’s proliferation levels. For instance, it has been shown that the hyperpolarization of the Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells to −70 mV leads to mitotic arrest and this effect was shown to be reversible when the membrane potential was depolarised back to the normal RMP of −10 mV ([Cone and Tongier, 1973]). This effect seems to be the opposite of what is known in other cell types. Membrane potential control of proliferation is a complex relationship because the membrane potential relies on the activity of many ion channels. [Cone and Tongier (1973)] were not able to address the nature of the specific ion channels involved, but hypothesized that it would be Hodgkin Huxley ([Hodgkin and Huxley, 1952a]) like voltage-gated Na+ and K+ channels. Further work later explores a range of voltage-gated ion channels involved in this process ([Rao et al., 2015]), see “cell cycle” below. However, it is also important to note that the downstream events are different for every cell type and can be as a result of voltage or the flow of certain ions across the membrane.

Many of the studies on the relationship between the membrane potential and proliferation have been carried out on K+ channels and it has been shown that the inhibition of the K+ currents results in the inhibition of proliferation in many cell types such as lymphocytes, PBMCs, Schwann cells, astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, and different types of cancer cells ([Wonderlin and Strobl, 1996]; [MacFarlane and Sontheimer, 2000]). Additionally, in some cell types the inhibition of K+ currents results in the activation of proliferation. The identity of the specific potassium channels involved seems to be very cell type specific and indeed both Ca2+ activated K+ channels (KCNMA) ([Garcia et al., 1991]) and KV1.3 (KCNA3) channels ([Garcia-Calvo et al., 1993]) have been separately identified on the basis of toxin inhibition (charybdotoxin and margatoxin, respectively). Furthermore, it was shown that cells that are post-mitotic such as those in the CNS can be coaxed back to enter the cell cycle after sustained depolarisation. Depolarising astrocytes with ouabain causes their increased proliferation and DNA synthesis ([MacFarlane and Sontheimer, 2000]).

Contractility of VSMs, as previously mentioned, is regulated by the membrane potential; however, these cells can switch phenotype during injury or development ([Frid et al., 1997]). The different phenotypes have different ion channel expressions. Interestingly, there is a switch in the type of ion channels that are expressed in each phenotype which contribute to the regulation of the membrane potential and hence the contractility of the VSMs phenotype. For example, serum induced proliferation (a common VSM tissue culture technique) leads to elevations of the canonical transient potential channel (TRPC1) and elevated resting Ca2+ concentration ([Stenmark et al., 2006]). In another example, mitogen-driven proliferation in immune cells, which is mediated by K+ channels is also regulate by the membrane potential ([Deutsch et al., 1986]). Furthermore, numerous studies show that cancer cell proliferation is regulated by different ion channel modulators implying a role for the RMP. As well as that, the RMP has also been shown to regulate neuronal differentiation ([Messenger and Warner, 1979]). Recent data have shown that the RMP can also have an effect on the migration of cells where K+ channels (KCNQ1) and Na+ channels (NaV) were found to play a role in the migration of several stem-cell like cell types ([Djamgoz et al., 2001]; [Morokuma et al., 2008]). Additionally, the membrane potential also regulates proliferation through the modulation of the cell cycle. For example, the MCF-7 human breast cancer cell proliferation has been shown to require a characteristic RMP hyperpolarization during the G0/G1 phase of the cell cycle [46]. Regulation of the cell cycle through the RMP is further discussed below.

Cell Cycle

As discussed earlier, the membrane potential can regulate proliferation levels within cells through regulating the cell cycle progression. A hyperpolarized membrane potential inhibits mitosis as it blocks quiescent cells in the G1 phase of the cell cycle from entering the S phase and hence blocks the DNA synthesis. It is hypothesized that voltage-gated Na+ and/or Ca2+ channels open to depolarise cells and promote transition from G0/G1 to the S-phase. Whereas opening of K+ voltage-gated channels (such as KV11.1, the human ortholog also known as hERG or KCNH2) and closure of Na+/Ca2+ channels during the S-phase tend to re-polarize the cell and lead back to G0/G1 ([Rao et al., 2015]). It is postulated that there may be a threshold RMP level that cells need to overcome in order to drive DNA synthesis in cells. For example the expression of certain ion channels in proliferating astrocytes can be upregulated or downregulated depending on the RMP levels of the cells and the cell cycle stage that they are in. A cell cycle arrest in the G1/G0 phase of proliferating astrocytes induces a premature upregulation of an inwardly rectifying K+ channel (Kir) that results in the hyperpolarization of the membrane potential. Conversely, a cell cycle arrest in the S phase of the cell cycle causes a downregulation of an outwardly rectifying K+ channel (Kir) and hence the depolarisation of the RMP ([MacFarlane and Sontheimer, 2000]). This indicates that there seems to be a G1 to S phase transition checkpoint that is regulated by the membrane potential. In addition, the inhibition of ion channels that modulate the membrane potential, such as for example K+ channels, causes the inhibition of progression of cells onto the next stage of the cell cycle. The inhibition of K+ ion channels in non-β lymphocytes and cytolytic T lymphocytes can cause the inhibition of these cells’ progression through the G1 phase of the cell cycle and hence inhibits their activation ([Amigorena et al., 1990]). This membrane potential control of the cell cycle can be utilized as a mechanism to inhibit cancer cell proliferation, making it a potential target for future treatments.

Cancer Progression

Since cell cycle and cell proliferation are strongly influenced by the RMP, it is not surprising that cancer, one of the biggest killers in the western world is also closely linked to the RMP. Cancer is often understood as the interplay between the host organism and individual cell regulation ([Lobikin et al., 2012]), leading to questions on the relative importance of the role played by genetics, epigenetics and the environment. While the mutation centered models of cancer have led the field of research for many years, attention has moved to recognize the importance of the cellular environment. Cancer is fundamentally a developmental disorder of cell regulation, where there is a loss of the organizational capacity of the surrounding environment ([Chernet and Levin, 2013b]); the RMP is a key element in this environment as the cell membrane is where the cell meets its environment and where it interacts with biomechanical, biochemical, and bioelectrical gradients, all of which impinge the gene regulatory networks. Here we refer to bioelectrics as the EFs that are produced (the spatial and temporal ion flow) and sensed by non-excitable cells. A gateway through the cell membrane exists in the form of multiple ion channels that allow the controlled passage of specific ions. As mentioned earlier, the membrane potential is a key biophysical signal in non-excitable cells that regulates important activities such as proliferation and differentiation and is typically cell type specific (Table). Cancer differs from normal cells by the relatively depolarized state of its cells ([Cone, 1974]; [Binggeli and Cameron, 1980]; [Binggeli and Weinstein, 1986]); even as far back as the late 1930s tumors were detected based on their voltmeter readings ([Burr et al., 1938]; [Burr, 1940]). The RMP of cancer cells is more depolarized than their normal counterparts; this is illustrated in Figure which shows a series of tumor cells having a RMP that varies from ∼−5 mV to −50 mV ([Yang and Brackenbury, 2013]). The key hyperpolarizing channels are the Ca2+ activated K+ channel (KCNMA1), EAG (KCNH1), KV1.3 (KCNA3), KV3.4 (KCNC4), KATP (KCNJ8/11), and K2P channels (KCNK) whereas depolarisation is mediated by ERG (KCNH2), Kir (KCNJx), and chloride channels (CLCN1 and 2) ([Yang and Brackenbury, 2013]). This is very similar in range to non-tumor proliferating cells but not quiescent and more fully differentiated cells that are more polarized. The importance of the membrane potential in differentiation can be seen from the experiments of [Sundelacruz et al. (2008)] and [Lange et al. (2011)] where forced depolarization maintains cells in a stem-cell like state. Similarly, the depolarization of cells is able to induce a metastatic phenotype. This is particularly interesting as it demonstrates the “cancer at a distance” phenomenon. In Xenopus tadpoles, the depolarization of ‘instructor cells’ at the tip of the tail triggers serotonergic signaling that changes the behavior of all melanocytes in the tadpole ([Blackiston et al., 2011]; [Chernet and Levin, 2013a],[b]). These melanocytes exhibit properties of metastasis such as over-proliferation, cell shape change that facilitates migration, and colonization of other organs and tissues, but the hyperpolarization of cells is able to inhibit oncogene induced tumorigenesis. For example, Kir and constitutively open GlyRF99A, hyperpolarized cells and prevented the formation of tumors despite the strong expression of a co-transfected oncogene (Xrel3) ([Chernet and Levin, 2013b]); this was confirmed through the use of several different hyperpolarizing channels, indicating that tumor suppression was due to the RMP rather than any one specific channel. Cells derived from cancers with limited therapeutic choices such as those found in triple negative breast cancer patients have been engineered using an L-type voltage-gated Ca2+ channel (CaV1) that lacks inactivation. This channel is usually activated by membrane depolarization allowing Ca2+ influx; however, the engineered channel is activated at the RMP of −10 mV resulting in an inappropriate influx leading to apoptosis induced cell death ([Yu et al., 2017]).

Ion channels are good therapeutic targets (see for example, [Humphries and Dart, 2015]); however, the RMP is influenced by multiple channels and so it is possible that different combinations of ion channel modulating drugs and biologics may be required to effectively change a given RMP. One model of cancer formation is the stem-cell model, where specific cancers arise from stem-cell niches (e.g., basal cell carcinomas of the skin). Changes in the RMP at specific locations appear to act as a source of non-genetic information that affect developmental processes including cancer, and appears to be an untapped treatment mechanism in the war against cancer.

Cell Migration and Wound Healing

Tissue wounding is an interesting phenomenon because the electrical potential generated by the ion movement in healthy tissue is disrupted and a significant EF is generated that is necessary for wound healing ([Reid and Zhao, 2014]). Indeed, the EF over-rides other well-accepted physiological cues and initiates directional cell migration into the wounded area. Wound generated EFs are produced by the directional flow of charged ion species. Some of this ion flux will be due to leakage from damaged cells [which themselves have membrane potential dependent repair mechanisms ([Luxardi et al., 2014])] and tissue immediately after injury. However, large currents are generated for days after wounding that are not accounted for by immediate injury.

Epithelial wounding has been extensively studied, however, little is reported on the role of the membrane potential in response to wounding and healing. The maintenance of the structural integrity of epithelia is crucial to the function of this tissue type, and healing after injury has been described by two major mechanisms, cell migration and cytoskeleton reorganization ([Chifflet et al., 2005]). [Chifflet et al. (2005)] demonstrated that the ENaC ion channel enhanced membrane depolarization occurs at the leading edge of wounds, gradually extending toward neighboring cells, and that this depolarization supports the development of the characteristic actin reorganization found in healing cells. Actin reorganization is evident by the formation of actin cables that form at the leading edge of cells, analogous to the tightening of a purse string as the cells close the wound.

The effects of applied EFs in the wound healing process are becoming apparent ([Nuccitelli, 2003]). [Nuccitelli (2003)] speculated that when a cell is placed in an EF, the voltage across the plasma membrane will be modified the most in regions that are perpendicular to the EF lines. The ends of the cell that face the two poles of the field will experience the largest effect. Since current passing through a cell will encounter resistance predominately at the cell membrane, he speculated that a 100 μm long cell in a 100 mV/mm EF will experience a voltage drop of 10 mV, with the plasma membrane facing the positive pole having 5 mV more across it, and the membrane facing the negative pole having 5 mV less. In a cell with a membrane potential of −70mV, voltage-gated ion channels open following a depolarization of ∼10–20 mV, and thus would not be affected by a change of 5 mV. Open channels, however, may result in differential distribution of ions within the cell, with positive ions experiencing a larger force driving them into the cell at the membrane region facing the positive pole of the EF. In cells with membrane potentials that are inherently more depolarized, the effects may be more apparent. Such cells include MSCs and un-differentiated cells that have RMPs below −30mV. Some fully differentiated cells also have more depolarized RMPs, including chondrocytes ([Lewis et al., 2011a]) and osteoblasts, whereas other cells function with a positive RMP. Broken bones have been reported to heal more efficiently when an EF is applied across the break. Chondrocytes, in callus formation, and osteoblasts both have RMPs below −40 mV, however, it is the MSCs of the periosteum ([Zhao et al., 2011]; [Berendsen et al., 2014]) that are believed to migrate to the damaged site under the EF prior to differentiating into these cell types. Thus, in surface wounds or bone damage, a depolarized cell membrane appears to be key in wound healing through epithelial cell and MSC cell migration and cytoskeleton reorganization, respectively. The ion channels underlying these effects remain to be established.

Pigmentation

Finally, pigmentation in mammals is generally a membrane potential dependent process. In mammals, pigment cells such as skin and uveal melanocytes, and retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) cells are non-excitable cells that contain melanosomes which are lysosome-related organelles that synthesize melanin, the main pigment that colors eyes, skin and hair ([Sulem et al., 2007]). Melanin is essential for the protection of the skin and eyes against solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation. The changes in intracellular Ca2+ regulates the concentration of melanin in pigment cells. These intracellular free Ca2+ concentrations are regulated by the membrane potential of the pigment cells. Membrane depolarisation mediated by different ion channels causes the delay of transient potential receptor potential (TRPA1) ion channel inactivation, this leaves the channels open for longer and causes the sustained Ca2+ response required for melanogenesis ([Bellono et al., 2013]). It has been reported that the activation of TPC1 ion channels, which are highly permeable to Ca2+ ([Lagostena et al., 2017]), mediate changes in the membrane potential of the melanosomes, could facilitate the fusion between the melanosomes and other organelles, the plasma membrane, or protein transport vesicles ([Cang et al., 2014]). This could initiate the melanin transfer in the skin and hence enable protection of the genetic material of keratinocytes against UV radiation damage.

Conclusion

Over the past several years it has become clear that the RMP is far more widely important to biology than just a firing mechanism for action potentials of excitable cells but rather plays a central role in several biological functions. Modulation of the membrane potential is a potential new target for an additional range of drugs which target a range of diseases and biological functions from cancer through to wound healing and is likely to be key to the development of successful stem cell therapies. The continued exploration of ion channels, which have, in the past been seen as redundant is likely to become increasingly important as these mechanisms are further understood as we seek ever more therapeutic targets.

Author Contributions

All authors made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work and interpretation of data for the work, participated equally in drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content, and approved the content for publication and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

Footnotes

References