Talk:Refractory period (physiology)

Neuroscience Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physiology High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the brain, nerves and nervous system.

Depolarization

When looking at the page depolarization it says that depolarization is only when voltage is heading towards zero volts and never when it is not. So once it crosses zero volts it is actually repolarizing. I'm not an expert on this but there is a very long discussion on it in the site I mentioned, It definitetly needs to be fixed. ArrowStomper 06:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Depolarization is always thought of as the rising phase of an action potential even when it is above 0mv. This is due to the fact that it is still rising in comparison to the resting state of the neuron at -65mv. Therefore the frame of reference is not 0mv but -65mv that is why it is always said to be depolarising in the upward phase.

I may just be reiterating the previous paragraph, but from what I know as long as the voltage of the cell is becoming less negative, e.g. going from -90 to -65, or -90 to 0, or -90 to +100, the cell is said to be DEPOLARIZED. The state of being polarized just means, in the case of the typical cell, that the cellular interior is negative with respect to the extracellular environment, which is less negative (as in -40 or 0 or +60....). Perhaps the discussion of depolarization should say, rather than "the voltage approaches zero upon depolarization," that the inside of the cell simply becomes LESS NEGATIVE. This will encompass the wide range of depolarization values possible. Again, using the example of a resting potential of -90 mV, this could be -89.999 (although this would not reach threshold and cause an AP), or it could be -65 (more likely to reach threshold), or 0, or +100, because all of these values are less negative than -90 mV. If a cell does depolarize to a positive value it is NOT hyperpolarized. Hyperpolarization is when the cell interior becomes less negative than its resting potential, e.g. -90, to say -100 or -120. There's no such thing, to my knowledge, as hyperdepolarization. If the cell's depolarized, it's depolarized. What's important there is whether the cell has reached the threshold for axon potential generation.

Another comment I wanted to make is that, while sexual refractory period is a physiological phenomenon that belongs in discussions of anatomy and physiology, I am not sure whether its location here is appropriate. There are children, probably in middle school and possibly elementary, who might be researching muscle contraction. If the sexual refractory period article did not refer to actions such as masturbation and oral sex, I think it would be okay to know that animals may have refractory periods for physiological processes other than skeletal and cardiac muscle contraction, such as sex. I think Wikipedia is an excellent resource, and I am not to keen on censorship, but I think it would be a shame to expose children to something better learned when they have actually reached puberty. This is a moral question, of course, but it would be unfortunate if children couldn't use Wikipedia because their parents saw such terms in an otherwise harmless article. I think the article would be appropriate in this section if questionable terms such as masturbation and oral-genital stimulation were removed. I am going to remove them, and if the author has a problem, it's a universal website so add them back but please keep this editorial so discussion can be open. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.96.30.10 (talk) 15:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a moral question that we have already taken a very clear stance on: Wikipedia contains content you may find objectionable. Raul654 15:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the subject of polarization, polarization refers to a difference in charge being created between the inside and outside of a cell. Polarization is when the charges are moving apart from each other. Therefore, up until the inside of the neuron's charge met and exceeded the outside charge, the cell (well the area inside the pore expelling Na+ and K+) would be depolarizing. I was told this by a Psychology PH.D. the other day, I can't verify the truth of it beyond that. -CPM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.59.224 (talk) 20:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Threshold

The listed threshold, -45mV, seems a bit high. Am I thinking of a different kind of cell? -CPM

refractory period label looks wrong.

The schematic picture of an electrophysiological recording of an action potential labels the hyperpolarization segment to be the refractory period, but the article itself and other sources ^[1] say that the WHOLE of the action potential encompasses a refractory period, with the absolute refractory portion starting at the initiation of the AP & continuing until when the falling (repolarization) phase reaches a value approximately just above the trigger voltage, and the rest of the AP from there through hyperpolarization until resting potential is reached is the relative refractory period. UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 03:22, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure out how to edit the Wiki Commons picture of the action potential to make it more accurate, can anyone tell me how to edit that picture? UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 02:57, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ http://www.physiologyweb.com/lecture_notes/neuronal_action_potential/neuronal_action_potential_refractory_periods.html

Confusing Reference labels

It is confusing that the 6 items in the article's list of references are labelled 1 to 3 and then another 1 to 3. I have never seen anything like that previously.

I tried a dummy edit of the section and found that (despite it only showing one set of 3) it had each of the references in a "group B".

This clarified that, where the article contained "[1][B: 3]", it is a pair of references (one from each group).

However, I can not imagine any advantages in such a separation but only disadvantage problems with (a) understanding the list, and (b) editing all of its content.

202.168.33.73 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.physiologyweb.com/lecture_notes/neuronal_action_potential/neuronal_action_potential_refractory_periods.html

[1]