↓ Skip to main content

Functional significance of M-type potassium channels in nociceptive cutaneous sensory endings

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Functional significance of M-type potassium channels in nociceptive cutaneous sensory endings
Published in
Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnmol.2012.00063
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gayle M. Passmore, Joanne M. Reilly, Matthew Thakur, Vanessa N. Keasberry, Stephen J. Marsh, Anthony H. Dickenson, David A. Brown

Abstract

M-channels carry slowly activating potassium currents that regulate excitability in a variety of central and peripheral neurons. Functional M-channels and their Kv7 channel correlates are expressed throughout the somatosensory nervous system where they may play an important role in controlling sensory nerve activity. Here we show that Kv7.2 immunoreactivity is expressed in the peripheral terminals of nociceptive primary afferents. Electrophysiological recordings from single afferents in vitro showed that block of M-channels by 3 μM XE991 sensitized Aδ- but not C-fibers to noxious heat stimulation and induced spontaneous, ongoing activity at 32°C in many Aδ-fibers. These observations were extended in vivo: intraplantar injection of XE991 selectively enhanced the response of deep dorsal horn (DH) neurons to peripheral mid-range mechanical and higher range thermal stimuli, consistent with a selective effect on Aδ-fiber peripheral terminals. These results demonstrate an important physiological role of M-channels in controlling nociceptive Aδ-fiber responses and provide a rationale for the nocifensive behaviors that arise following intraplantar injection of the M-channel blocker XE991.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 27%
Student > Bachelor 13 20%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Master 6 9%
Unspecified 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 31%
Neuroscience 14 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 8%
Unspecified 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 10 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#2,849
of 3,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,483
of 250,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#40
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,335 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 250,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.