Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18065468›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2008

How does intracellular Ca2+ oscillate: by chance or by the clock?

Alexander Skupin, Helmut Kettenmann, Ulrike Winkler, Maria Wartenberg, Heinrich Sauer, Stephen C Tovey, Colin W Taylor, Martin Falcke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

78 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. An integrate-and-fire approach to CaBiophysical journal · 2023
    Article
  6. Maintenance of hematopoietic stem cell niche homeostasis requires gap junction-mediated calcium signaling.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  7. Modeling IPBiophysical journal · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. An integrate-and-fire approach to CaBiophysical journal · 2023
    Article
  10. Computational investigation of IPScientific reports · 2023
    Article
  11. Characterizing spontaneous CaBiophysical journal · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Fundamentals of Cellular Calcium Signaling: A Primer.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Alexander SkupinDepartment of Theoretical Physics, Hahn Meitner Institut, Berlin, Germany.
Helmut Kettenmann
Ulrike Winkler
Maria Wartenberg
Heinrich Sauer
Stephen C Tovey
Colin W Taylor
Martin Falcke

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ca2+ oscillations have been considered to obey deterministic dynamics for almost two decades. We show for four cell types that Ca2+ oscillations are instead a sequence of random spikes. The standard deviation of the interspike intervals (ISIs) of individual spike trains is similar to the average ISI; it increases approximately linearly with the average ISI; and consecutive ISIs are uncorrelated. Decreasing the effective diffusion coefficient of free Ca2+ using Ca2+ buffers increases the average ISI and the standard deviation in agreement with the idea that individual spikes are caused by random wave nucleation. Array-enhanced coherence resonance leads to regular Ca2+ oscillations with small standard deviation of ISIs.

Indexed as

OscillometryAction PotentialsAnimalsBiophysicsCalciumCalcium SignalingCell MembraneDiffusionElectrophysiologyHumansModels, BiologicalNeuronsStochastic ProcessesCalcium

Identifiers

PMID18065468
PMCPMC2257893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.