pcbi.1007661.g006.tif (359.07 kB)
Download file

Model comparison for scenario with low frequency firing.

Download (359.07 kB)
posted on 29.04.2020, 17:47 by Marte J. Sætra, Gaute T. Einevoll, Geir Halnes

Simulations on the PR model and edPR model when both models are driven by a constant input, giving them a firing rate of about 1 Hz. Simulations covered one hour (3600 s) of biological time. (A-D) A 10 s sample of the dynamics of the somatic membrane potential ϕsm and dendritic (free) Ca2+ concentration in the PR model (A-B) and edPR model (C-D). This regular firing pattern was sustained over the full 3600 s simulation in both models (inset panels). (D) Of the total amount of intracellular Ca2+, only 1% (as plotted) was assumed to be free (unbuffered). (E-F) Ionic reversal potentials and (G-J) ion concentrations in the edPR model did not vary on a long time scale. Indices i, e, s, and d indicate intracellular, extracellular, soma, and dendrite, respectively. (A-J) Stimulus onset was t = 10 s in both models, and stimulus strength was istim = 0.78μA/cm2 in the PR model (A-B) and istim = 27pA in the edPR model (C-J). See the Parameterizations section in Methods for a full description of the parameters used.