pcbi.1005342.g003.tif (449.54 kB)
Comparison of methods of modeling variability.
figure
posted on 2017-01-20, 17:41 authored by Tanmay A. Gokhale, Jong M. Kim, Robert D. Kirkton, Nenad Bursac, Craig S. HenriquezModeling of cell-to-cell conductance variation and inter-monolayer conductance variation alone, or in combination (“dual variation”) is not sufficient to match all experimental variability. The addition of inter-monolayer bulk conductivity variation (“triple variation”) allowed for the replication of experimentally observed variability in single cells (A and B), as well as in macroscopic conduction velocity (C). Box plots to the left of each histogram indicate mean +/- one standard deviation. Asterisks indicate that variances are significantly different (p < 0.05) from experimental variability, using Levene’s test for equal variances.
History
Usage metrics
Categories
Keywords
computational-experimental studiesmacroscopic conductiontissue culturesinter-monolayer variationaction potentialsbiosynthetic excitable tissuesInherent Variabilityexcitable tissueexcitable cellMulticellular monolayer culturesdrug-modified conduction behaviorelucidate mechanismstissue conductivityHEK 293 cellsmodeling variationPaired Computational-Experimental StudiesRandom cell-to-cellconduction anomaliescardiomyocyte monolayerscell-to-cell conductance variationExcitable Biosynthetic Tissuenovel frameworkexcitable HEK 293 cellstissue modelsearch algorithmimpact macroscopic behaviorEx 293 cellelectrophysiological dataexcitable tissues
Licence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC