This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hope this image of the four patch configurations helps. 222.152.90.238 ( talk) 09:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Most of this article was cut-and-pasted on Feb 22, 2005 from the voltage clamp article as part of an attempt to clean up that article. Anyone interested in the history of this article should therefore look at the voltage clamp history page prior to that date. I did not write this article. I have a limited knowledge of electrophysiology, but I believe there are several errors in the article. I will try to fix them to the best of my ability, but it may take a few days. Sayeth 21:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
This technique is commonly known as "Patch Clamping" or "To Patch Clamp". However, the term "Patch Clamp" is also commonly taken to mean the specific instrument with which you "Patch".
See http://www.cairn-research.co.uk/systems/prod_patch1.html or http://www.moleculardevices.com/pages/instruments/cn_axopatch200b.html For examples of Patch Clamps.
Not sure if I agree with the perforated patch section: I've recorded for several hours with gramicidin perforations without any obvious loss of the cell's properties, ie. longer than in whole-cell configuration. Would be nice to see a source for this statement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.216.34 ( talk) 19:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
"This has the advantage of reducing the dialysis of the cell that occurs in whole cell recordings, but also has several disadvantages. First, the access *resistance is higher* (access resistance being the sum of the electrode resistance and the resistance at the electrode-cell junction). This will decrease current resolution, increase recording noise, and magnify any series resistance error."
Why does the access resistance become higher instead of lower? Higher in comparison to whole cell recording? Or in comparison to cell attached recording without gramicidin? I suppose the component "electrode-cell junction" is due to the change of resistance (?). And why is a high resistance a disadvantage? As far as I understood a high access resistance is intended ("Gigaseal") to prevent ions from flowing between membrane and electrode and over the glass of the electrode. (The resistance of the pipette-solution and the silver electrode should (of course) be small.)
I would be very glad to get this explaned as I am a beginner in this subject.
Another editor has raised a question here on my talk, about which image file would be better to show a single channel recording. The files in question are File:Single channel.png, which is on the page now, and File:V-clamp-GlyR.jpg, which is the alternative. My thoughts, and the other editor's concerns, are explained at the link in my talk. What do other editors think? -- Tryptofish ( talk) 23:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hope this image of the four patch configurations helps. 222.152.90.238 ( talk) 09:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Most of this article was cut-and-pasted on Feb 22, 2005 from the voltage clamp article as part of an attempt to clean up that article. Anyone interested in the history of this article should therefore look at the voltage clamp history page prior to that date. I did not write this article. I have a limited knowledge of electrophysiology, but I believe there are several errors in the article. I will try to fix them to the best of my ability, but it may take a few days. Sayeth 21:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
This technique is commonly known as "Patch Clamping" or "To Patch Clamp". However, the term "Patch Clamp" is also commonly taken to mean the specific instrument with which you "Patch".
See http://www.cairn-research.co.uk/systems/prod_patch1.html or http://www.moleculardevices.com/pages/instruments/cn_axopatch200b.html For examples of Patch Clamps.
Not sure if I agree with the perforated patch section: I've recorded for several hours with gramicidin perforations without any obvious loss of the cell's properties, ie. longer than in whole-cell configuration. Would be nice to see a source for this statement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.216.34 ( talk) 19:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
"This has the advantage of reducing the dialysis of the cell that occurs in whole cell recordings, but also has several disadvantages. First, the access *resistance is higher* (access resistance being the sum of the electrode resistance and the resistance at the electrode-cell junction). This will decrease current resolution, increase recording noise, and magnify any series resistance error."
Why does the access resistance become higher instead of lower? Higher in comparison to whole cell recording? Or in comparison to cell attached recording without gramicidin? I suppose the component "electrode-cell junction" is due to the change of resistance (?). And why is a high resistance a disadvantage? As far as I understood a high access resistance is intended ("Gigaseal") to prevent ions from flowing between membrane and electrode and over the glass of the electrode. (The resistance of the pipette-solution and the silver electrode should (of course) be small.)
I would be very glad to get this explaned as I am a beginner in this subject.
Another editor has raised a question here on my talk, about which image file would be better to show a single channel recording. The files in question are File:Single channel.png, which is on the page now, and File:V-clamp-GlyR.jpg, which is the alternative. My thoughts, and the other editor's concerns, are explained at the link in my talk. What do other editors think? -- Tryptofish ( talk) 23:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)