MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063161222 · doi:10.1063/1.3207820

Investigating the effects of molecular crowding on Ca2+ diffusion using a particle-based simulation model

2009· article· en· W2063161222 on OpenAlexafffund
Ronny Straube, Douglas Ridgway

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsCrowdingDiffusionParticle (ecology)Statistical physicsChemical physicsComputer scienceMaterials sciencePsychologyChemistryPhysicsThermodynamicsCognitive psychologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calcium ions (Ca(2+)) are an important second messenger in eucaryotic cells. They are involved in numerous physiological processes which are triggered by calcium signals in the form of local release events, temporal oscillations, or reaction-diffusion waves. The diffusive spread of calcium signals in the cytosol is strongly affected by calcium-binding proteins (buffers). In addition, the cytosol contains a large number of inert molecules and molecular structures which make it a crowded environment. Here, we investigate the effects of such excluded volumes on calcium diffusion in the presence of different kinds of buffers. We find that the contributions in slowing down Ca(2+) diffusion coming from buffering and molecular crowding are not additive, i.e., the reduction in Ca(2+) diffusivity due to crowding and buffering together is not the sum of each single contribution. In the presence of Ca(2+) gradients and high affinity mobile buffers the effective diffusion coefficient of Ca(2+) can be reduced by up to 60% in highly crowded environments. This suggests that molecular crowding may significantly affect the shape of Ca(2+) microdomains and wave propagation in cell types with high excluded volume fractions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear ScienceSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207