MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094152133 · doi:10.1139/y03-019

Propagation of action potentials between parallel chains of cardiac muscle cells in PSpice simulation

2003· article· en· W2094152133 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicholas Sperelakis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGap junctionBiophysicsMyocyteCardiac muscleCell membraneMembrane potentialChemistryCellAnatomyBiologyIntracellularCell biologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Propagation of action potentials between parallel chains of cardiac muscle cells was simulated using the PSpice program. Excitation was transmitted from cell to cell along a strand of three or four cells not connected by low-resistance tunnels (gap-junction connexons) in parallel with one or two similar strands. Thus, two models were used: a 2 x 3 model (two parallel chains of three cells each) and a 3 x 4 model (three parallel chains of four cells each). The entire surface membrane of each cell fired nearly simultaneously, and nearly all the propagation time was spent at the cell junctions, thus giving a staircase-shaped propagation profile. The junctional delay time between contiguous cells in a chain was about 0.2-0.5 ms. A significant negative cleft potential develops in the narrow junctional clefts, whose magnitude depends on several factors, including the radial cleft resistance (Rjc). The cleft potential (Vjc) depolarizes the postjunctional membrane to threshold by a patch-clamp action. Therefore, one mechanism for the transfer of excitation from one cell to the next is by the electric field (EF) that is generated in the junctional cleft when the prejunctional membrane fires. Propagation velocity increased with elevation of Rjc. With electrical stimulation of the first cell of the first strand (cell A1), propagation rapidly spread down that chain and then jumped to the second strand (B chain), followed by jumping to the third strand (C chain) when present. The rapidity by which the parallel chains became activated depended on the longitudinal resistance of the narrow extracellular cleft between the parallel strands (Rol2). The higher the Rol2 resistance, the faster the propagation (lower propagation time) over the cardiac muscle sheet (2-dimensional). The transverse resistance of the cleft had no effect. When the first cell of the second strand (cell B1) was stimulated, propagation spread down the B chain and jumped to the other two strands (A and C) nearly simultaneously. When cell C1 was stimulated, propagation traveled down the C chain and jumped to the B chain, followed by excitation of the A chain. Thus, there was transverse propagation of excitation as longitudinal propagation was occurring. Therefore, transmission of excitation by the EF mechanism can occur between myocardial cells lying closely parallel to one another without the requirement of a specialized junction.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207