↓ Skip to main content

Calcium Transient and Sodium-Calcium Exchange Current in Human versus Rabbit Sinoatrial Node Pacemaker Cells

Overview of attention for article published in The Scientific World Journal, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Calcium Transient and Sodium-Calcium Exchange Current in Human versus Rabbit Sinoatrial Node Pacemaker Cells
Published in
The Scientific World Journal, February 2013
DOI 10.1155/2013/507872
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arie O. Verkerk, Marcel M. G. J. van Borren, Ronald Wilders

Abstract

There is an ongoing debate on the mechanism underlying the pacemaker activity of sinoatrial node (SAN) cells, focusing on the relative importance of the "membrane clock" and the "Ca(2+) clock" in the generation of the small net membrane current that depolarizes the cell towards the action potential threshold. Specifically, the debate centers around the question whether the membrane clock-driven hyperpolarization-activated current, I f , which is also known as the "funny current" or "pacemaker current," or the Ca(2+) clock-driven sodium-calcium exchange current, I NaCa, is the main contributor to diastolic depolarization. In our contribution to this journal's "Special Issue on Cardiac Electrophysiology," we present a numerical reconstruction of I f and I NaCa in isolated rabbit and human SAN pacemaker cells based on experimental data on action potentials, I f , and intracellular calcium concentration ([Ca(2+)] i ) that we have acquired from these cells. The human SAN pacemaker cells have a smaller I f , a weaker [Ca(2+)] i transient, and a smaller I NaCa than the rabbit cells. However, when compared to the diastolic net membrane current, I NaCa is of similar size in human and rabbit SAN pacemaker cells, whereas I f is smaller in human than in rabbit cells.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Korea, Republic of 1 3%
Unknown 29 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Researcher 6 19%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 7 23%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 16%
Engineering 4 13%
Computer Science 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 2 6%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 March 2013.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from The Scientific World Journal
#2,266
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,818
of 205,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Scientific World Journal
#55
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 205,666 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.