K<sup>+</sup>current changes account for the rate dependence of the action potential in the human atrial myocyte
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ongoing investigation of the electrophysiology and pathophysiology of the human atria requires an accurate representation of the membrane dynamics of the human atrial myocyte. However, existing models of the human atrial myocyte action potential do not accurately reproduce experimental observations with respect to the kinetics of key repolarizing currents or rate dependence of the action potential and fail to properly enforce charge conservation, an essential characteristic in any model of the cardiac membrane. In addition, recent advances in experimental methods have resulted in new data regarding the kinetics of repolarizing currents in the human atria. The goal of this study was to develop a new model of the human atrial action potential, based on the Nygren et al. model of the human atrial myocyte and newly available experimental data, that ensures an accurate representation of repolarization processes and reproduction of action potential rate dependence and enforces charge conservation. Specifically, the transient outward K(+) current (I(t)) and ultrarapid rectifier K(+) current (I(Kur)) were newly formulated. The inwardly recitifying K(+) current (I(K1)) was also reanalyzed and implemented appropriately. Simulations of the human atrial myocyte action potential with this new model demonstrated that early repolarization is dependent on the relative conductances of I(t) and I(Kur), whereas densities of both I(Kur) and I(K1) underlie later repolarization. In addition, this model reproduces experimental measurements of rate dependence of I(t), I(Kur), and action potential duration. This new model constitutes an improved representation of excitability and repolarization reserve in the human atrial myocyte and, therefore, provides a useful computational tool for future studies involving the human atrium in both health and disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".