Joy Li

Biology 473 Spring 2016

TA: Javier Solivan and Mary Chen
Action Potentials in the Sciatic Nerve
Results
Table 1 summarizes the action potentials of a Sciatic Nerve removed from a frog, documenting both the
forward and reverse processes (from spine to knee and vice versa). In the forward process, the threshold
stimulus voltage was 30 mV, and the magnitude of the threshold response was 2.78 mV. The maximal
stimulus voltage of the forward process was 300 mV, and the magnitude of the maximal stimulus
response was 45.81 mV. The conduction velocity for this orientation was 25 m/s. The orientation of the
nerve was flipped to produce data for the reverse process. The threshold stimulus voltage this way was
also 30 mV, the same as the forward process. The magnitude of the threshold response was not obtained,
however. The maximal stimulus voltage of the reverse process was 300 mV, the same as the forward
process, too. The magnitude of the maximal stimulus response was also not obtained, and the conduction
velocity was 20 m/s in this case, a 5 m/s difference from the initial action potential.
Table 1: Forward and Reverse Action Potential of Frog Sciatic Nerve
Threshold Stimulus Voltage
Threshold Magnitude
Maximal Stimulus Voltage
Maximal Stimulus Magnitude
Conduction Velocity

Initial Action Potential

30 mV
2.78 mV
300 mV
45.81 mV
25 m/s

Reversed Action Potential

30 mV
Not obtained
300 mV
Not obtained
20 m/s

A frog sciatic nerve was removed from the leg and stimulated forward from spine to knee and in reverse from knee
to spine. The stimulus voltage was recorded along with the response.

Discussion
The data supports the concept that there is no difference in threshold stimulus voltage and maximal
stimulus voltage between the forward and reverse processes. Changing the direction of the action
potentials across the nerve did not affect either the threshold stimulus voltage or the maximal stimulus

voltage, but did result in a 5 m/s difference in the conduction velocity. This was overall consistent with
what was expected as an outcome. The data appears to be strong, since the threshold and maximal values
are the same for the forward and reverse processes. There is a small difference in the conduction
velocities, but it does not significantly weaken the data. The threshold magnitude and the maximal
stimulus magnitude for the reverse process was not recorded, as there was not adequate data. However,
these values should have been nearly the same as those of the forward reaction.
The experiment involved action potentials across the sciatic nerve through stimulation. It allowed
the visualization of the threshold stimulus being reached, and an action potential being initiated.
Depolarization occurs as sodium channels opens, resulting in an influx of sodium to the cell. The cell
becomes more positive as a result, and the sodium channels close. Meanwhile, potassium channels open
and potassium is moved out of the cell, making it more negative. These channels close slower, causing the
hyperpolarization of the cell. The cell is brought back to resting potential through the work of sodiumpotassium pumps. In the experiment, the frog nerve action potential seemed to be a graded response,
which can be explained by the fact that each axon in the bundle has its own threshold. The experiment
also indicated a fast conduction velocity, which can be partially attributed to the presence of myelin
sheaths along the axons of the cells. (Silverthorn, 2015)
Finally, the experiment demonstrated little or no change in the forward and reverse action
potentials, suggesting there is no directionality. Although action potentials typically flow in a certain
direction within the body, they have cell bodies and dendrites that cause that effect. In the experiment,
only the axon was cut out, resulting in no means of differentiation between the forwards or the reverse.
Because of this, the action potentials were nearly the same between the two orientations.
Limitations of the experiment included difficulties with the computer and program. One source of
error dealt with deterioration of the nerve as time passed, potentially affecting the accuracy of the
measurements, particularly with the reversed action potential. Another source of error involved the
amount of Ringer's solution used on the nerve, and the amount within the chamber (potentially short
circuiting the electrodes). In future attempts, two groups could be assigned to the same experiment, with

one testing the forward action potential and the other testing the reverse simultaneously, to avoid as much
deterioration.
References
Waters, John R., and Nanette J. Tomicek. Physiology Laboratory Manual. 3rd ed. Plymouth:
Hayden-McNeil, 2016. Print.
Silverthorn, Dee U. Human Physiology. 7th Ed. Pearson, 2015. Print.