Figure 35.12 describes experiments conducted to measure the resting membrane potential of a squid giant axon and changes in the membrane potential when the cell was stimulated to fire an action potential. Answer the questions after the figure to practice interpreting data and understanding experimental design. These questions refer to concepts that are explained in the following three brief data analysis primers from a set of four available on LaunchPad.
You can find these primers by clicking on the button labeled “Resources” in the menu at the upper right on your main LaunchPad page, then select “Content by type.” Within the following questions, click on “Primer Section” to read the relevant section from these primers. Click on the button labeled “Key Terms” to see pop-up definitions of boldfaced terms.
HOW DO WE KNOW?
BACKGROUND In order to record the voltage of the inside of a nerve cell relative to the outside, a small electrical recording device, a microelectrode, was inserted into a neuron. The technique is more easily performed on large cells, such as the squid giant axon. This axon, as its name suggests, is quite large, measuring 0.5 mm in diameter (Fig. 35.12a). The large diameter of the axon allows electrical signals to be propagated to the muscles very quickly. Vertebrate neurons are much smaller; they rely on myelin sheaths rather than large size for rapid conduction of electrical signals.
EXPERIMENT In 1939, two British neurophysiologists, Alan Hodgkin and Andrew Huxley, inserted a microelectrode into a squid giant axon with a reference electrode on the outside (Fig. 35.12b). They then used a separate set of electrodes (not shown) to depolarize the cell to threshold, triggering an action potential.
RESULTS Fig. 35.12c is a trace from Hodgkin and Huxley's 1939 paper showing the resting membrane potential and the course of an action potential recorded by the electrode inside a giant squid axon. Note that the resting potential is negative on the inside of the axon relative to the outside, and that the action potential is a rapid spike in potential, with the inside of the cell quickly becoming positive, then negative again. The large size of the spike was a surprise.
FOLLOW-UP WORK This work was performed before the ion channels responsible for the changes in current across the membrane were identified. Subsequent work focused on identifying these channels and their roles in generating the action potential.
SOURCE Hodgkin, A. L., and A. F. Huxley. 1939. "Action Potentials Recorded from Inside a Nerve Fibre." Nature 144:710-711; R. D. Keynes. 1989. "The Role of Giant Axons in Studies of the Nerve Impulse." Bioessays 10:90-94.
Which of the following could have been a hypothesis for the experiment described in Figure 35.12?
A. |
B. |
C. |
D. |
E. |
hypothesis | A tentative explanation for one or more observations that makes predictions that can be tested by experiments or additional observations. |
Experimental Design
Experiments provide one way to make sense of the world. There are many different kinds of experiments, some of which begin with observations. Charles Darwin began with all kinds of observations—the relationship between living organisms and fossils, the distribution of organisms on the Earth, species found on islands and nowhere else—and inferred an evolutionary process to explain what he saw. Other experiments begin with data collection. For example, genome studies begin by collecting vast amounts of data—the sequence of nucleotides in all of the DNA of an organism—and then ask questions about the patterns that are found.
Such observations can lead to questions – Why are organisms adapted to their environment? Why are there so many endemic species (organisms found in one place and nowhere else) on islands? Why does the human genome contain vast stretches of DNA that do not code for protein?
Types of Hypotheses
A hypothesis, as we saw in Chapter 1, is a tentative answer to the question, an expectation of what the results might be. This might at first seem counterintuitive. Science, after all, is supposed to be unbiased, so why should you expect any particular result at all? The answer is that it helps to organize the experimental setup and interpretation of the data.
Let’s consider a simple example. We design a new medicine and hypothesize that it can be used to treat headaches. This hypothesis is not just a hunch—it is based on previous observations or experiments. For example, we might observe that the chemical structure of the medicine is similar to other drugs that we already know are used to treat headaches. If we went into the experiment with no expectation at all, it would be unclear what to measure.
A hypothesis is considered tentative because we don’t know what the answer is. The answer has to wait until we conduct the experiment and look at the data. When an experiment predicts a specific effect, as in the case of the new medicine, it is typical to also state a null hypothesis, which predicts no effect. Hypotheses are never proven, but it is possible based on statistical analysis to reject a hypothesis. When a null hypothesis is rejected, the hypothesis gains support.
Sometimes, we formulate several alternative hypotheses to answer a single question. This may be the case when researchers consider different explanations of their data. Let’s say for example that we discover a protein that represses the expression of a gene. Our question might be: How does the protein repress the expression of the gene? In this case, we might come up with several models—the protein might block transcription, it might block translation, or it might interfere with the function of the protein product of the gene. Each of these models is an alternative hypothesis, one or more of which might be correct.