N.Wells
Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
| Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 09 2016,22:55) | | Quote (N.Wells @ Jan. 09 2016,22:36) | | Figure 1B explicitly reports an average of 0 with very little variation over 35 samples of 30 seconds each. |
For a resting membrane potential of 0 volts an action potential is expected to go negative in the "undershoot" that comes before a return back to zero. Duh? Duh?
 |
A refractory period after a drop is by definition BELOW the resting potential and is not part of it. The baseline is re-established AFTER recovery. That's all labelled very clearly (apparently to everyone but you) in the diagram you keep repeating (note how the period of "hyperpolarization" or "undershoot" is clearly separated from the "resting potential"). You appear to like 'own goals'.
The average resting potential reported in the paper for the stem is indistinguishable from 0 mV, so that's the baseline. Moreover, a supposed drop of -0.5 mV is of dubious significance compared to a resting potential of 0 mV, so it is not obvious that the supposed drop is either real or a true refractory period.
But feel free to try saying "Duh?" a few more times - the effect is quite comical.
|
