Alterations in action potential profile enhance excitation‐contraction coupling in rat cardiac myocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Action potential (AP) prolongation typically occurs in heart disease due to reductions in transient outward potassium currents (Ito), and is associated with increased Ca2+ transients. We investigated the underlying mechanisms responsible for enhanced Ca2+ transients in normal isolated rat ventricular myocytes in response to the AP changes that occur following myocardial infarction. Normal myocytes stimulated with a train of long post-myocardial infarction (MI) APs showed a 2.2-fold elevation of the peak Ca2+ transient and a 2.7-fold augmentation of fractional cell shortening, relative to myocytes stimulated with a short control AP. The steady-state Ca2+ load of the sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR) was increased 2.0-fold when myocytes were stimulated with trains of long post-MI APs (111 +/- 21.6 micromol l(-1)) compared with short control APs (56 +/- 7.2 micromol l(-1)). Under conditions of equal SR Ca2+ load, long post-MI APs still resulted in a 1.7-fold increase in peak [Ca2+]i and a 3.8-fold increase in fractional cell shortening relative to short control APs, establishing that changes in the triggering of SR Ca2+ release are largely responsible for elevated Ca2+ transients following AP prolongation. Fractional SR Ca2+ release calculated from the measured SR Ca2+ load and the integrated SR Ca2+ fluxes was 24 +/- 3 and 11 +/- 2 % following post-MI and control APs, respectively. The fractional release (FR) of Ca2+ from the SR divided by the integrated L-type Ca2+ flux (FR/[integral]FCa,L) was increased 1.2-fold by post-MI APs compared with control APs. Similar increases in excitation-contraction (E-C) coupling gains were observed establishing enhanced E-C coupling efficiency. Our findings demonstrate that AP prolongation alone can markedly enhance E-C coupling in normal myocytes through increases in the L-type Ca2+ current (ICa,L) trigger combined with modest enhancements in Ca2+ release efficiency. We propose that such changes in AP profile in diseased myocardium may contribute significantly to alterations in E-C coupling independent of other biochemical or genetic changes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".