» Articles » PMID: 16660164

Comparison of Three Methods for Measuring Electrical Resistances of Plant Cell Membranes

Overview
Journal Plant Physiol
Specialty Physiology
Date 1977 Nov 1
PMID 16660164
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The reliability of two different membrane resistance-measuring methods that use a single intracellular microelectrode was tested against a conventional method that uses two intracellular microelectrodes. The first single-electrode method used a single square current pulse and required a constant microelectrode resistance. This method was unreliable because the electrode resistance changed markedly on cell penetration and changed with time within the cell. The second method used a high frequency square wave for injecting current into the cell and depended upon the membrane having a much longer RC (resistance x capacitance)-time constant than the microelectrode. The resistance values obtained by this latter method were usually different from membrane resistances obtained at the same time on the same cells using two intracellular microelectrodes. Therefore, neither single intracellular microelectrode method was as reliable as the conventional method. All tests were with coleoptile cells of Avena sativa var. Victory.

Citing Articles

The interpretation of intracellular measurements of membrane potential, resistance, and coupling in cells of higher plants.

Goldsmith T, Goldsmith M Planta. 2014; 143(3):267-74.

PMID: 24408464 DOI: 10.1007/BF00391997.


The contribution of tonoplast and plasma membrane to the electrical properties of a higher-plant cell.

Goldsmith M, Cleland R Planta. 2014; 143(3):261-5.

PMID: 24408463 DOI: 10.1007/BF00391996.


Electrical properties of the vertically growing root tip of Lepidium sativum L.

Behrens H, Gradmann D Planta. 2013; 163(4):453-62.

PMID: 24249444 DOI: 10.1007/BF00392702.


Effects of external pH, fusicoccin and butyrate on the cytoplasmic pH in barley root tips measured by (31)P-nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

Reid R, Field L, Pitman M Planta. 2013; 166(3):341-7.

PMID: 24241516 DOI: 10.1007/BF00401171.


Characterization of potassium-dependent currents in protoplasts of corn suspension cells.

Ketchum K, Shrier A, Poole R Plant Physiol. 1989; 89(4):1184-92.

PMID: 16666682 PMC: 1055994. DOI: 10.1104/pp.89.4.1184.


References
1.
Anderson W, Hendrix D, Higinbotham N . Higher plant cell membrane resistance by a single intracellular electrode method. Plant Physiol. 1974; 53(1):122-4. PMC: 541346. DOI: 10.1104/pp.53.1.122. View

2.
Etherton B . Relationship of Cell Transmembrane Electropotential to Potassium and Sodium Accumulation Ratios in Oat and Pea Seedlings. Plant Physiol. 1963; 38(5):581-5. PMC: 549976. DOI: 10.1104/pp.38.5.581. View

3.
Slayman C, SLAYMAN C . Depolarization of the plasma membrane of Neurospora during active transport of glucose: evidence for a proton-dependent cotransport system. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1974; 71(5):1935-9. PMC: 388357. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.71.5.1935. View

4.
Spanswick R . Evidence for an electrogenic ion pump in Nitella translucens. I. The effects of pH, K + , Na + , light and temperature on the membrane potential and resistance. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1972; 288(1):73-89. DOI: 10.1016/0005-2736(72)90224-6. View

5.
Higinbotham N, Hope A, Findlay G . Electrical Resistance of Cell Membranes of Avena coleoptiles. Science. 1964; 143(3613):1448-9. DOI: 10.1126/science.143.3613.1448. View