Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2004 Sep;124(3):239–258. doi: 10.1085/jgp.200409071

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

Copyright © 2004, The Rockefeller University Press

This article is distributed under the terms of an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike–No Mirror Sites license for the first six months after the publication date (see http://www.rupress.org/terms). After six months it is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 4.0 Unported license, as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).

PMC Copyright notice

Figure 12. — The “constant permeability” correction. (A) Blue trace: ≲t , same as in Fig. 7 B. Red: _c t , calculated according to Eq. 16. The choice of the value 14.5 mM for Ca_SR(0) led to a nearly constant corrected level during late portions of the conditioning pulse. Black: correction according to Eq. 17, with Ca_SR(0) = 11.5 mM and pump flux computed from the removal model, with best fit parameters given in the legend of Fig. 6. (B) Blue trace: ≲t , repeated from A. “Reverse correction” (black dashed) is obtained with Eq. 17, by increasing the term “pump flux” during the interval between conditioning and test, which increases the denominator in Eq. 17, until the corrected test release flux reaches the same steady level as the reference release flux (in accordance with the constant permeability hypothesis). An implausibly large 67% of the amount released during the conditioning pulse must return in order to reach this level.

Inline graphic — The “constant permeability” correction. (A) Blue trace: ≲t , same as in Fig. 7 B. Red: _c t , calculated according to Eq. 16. The choice of the value 14.5 mM for Ca_SR(0) led to a nearly constant corrected level during late portions of the conditioning pulse. Black: correction according to Eq. 17, with Ca_SR(0) = 11.5 mM and pump flux computed from the removal model, with best fit parameters given in the legend of Fig. 6. (B) Blue trace: ≲t , repeated from A. “Reverse correction” (black dashed) is obtained with Eq. 17, by increasing the term “pump flux” during the interval between conditioning and test, which increases the denominator in Eq. 17, until the corrected test release flux reaches the same steady level as the reference release flux (in accordance with the constant permeability hypothesis). An implausibly large 67% of the amount released during the conditioning pulse must return in order to reach this level.