Table 3. The optimal values of parameters and the R2 of fitted Eqs 1 and 2.
A–The growth medium, B–the low-conductivity buffer, C–the hyperosmotic buffer, D–the high-conductivity buffer, E–the buffer with calcium. Values in bold and the symbol next to them emphasize if the cells were desensitized (S2/average(S1)<1, symbol ↓), sensitized (S2/average(S1)>1, symbol ↑) or if the trains were equally effective (S2/average(S1)≈1, symbol ≈). The numbers after ± sign define 95% confidence interval. The graphical representation of S2/average(S1) and τ2/average(τ1), based on experimental uptake results in Fig 4, is in Fig 5.
| A–The growth medium | |||||
| Half dose | Single dose | 1 min delay | 2 min delay | 3 min delay | |
| S1 | 215.5 ± 7.5 | 354.8 ± 9.9 | 179.6 ± 14.2 | 197.4 ± 17.2 | 204.2 ± 8.2 |
| S2 | / | / | 265.9± 13.9 | 226.9 ± 12.5 | 207.6 ± 8.8 |
| τ1 | 65.91 ± 4.17 | 63.45± 3.33 | 44.02± 6.16 | 69.47± 10.07 | 46.13 ± 3.44 |
| τ2 | / | / | 48.37 ± 1.58 | 47.01± 3.25 | 37.76 ± 2.98 |
| k | 0.06664 ± 0.02 | 0.06825 ± 0.0267 | 0.1831 ± 0.0124 | 0.1234 ± 0.0339 | 0.1024 ± 0.0372 |
| S2/average(S1) | / | / | 1.34 ± 0.18 ↑ | 1.14 ± 0.15↑ | 1.04 ± 0.13≈ |
| τ2/average(τ1) | / | / | 0.86 ± 0.20 | 0.83 ± 0.20 | 0.67 ± 0.16 |
| R2 | 0.9954 | 0.9961 | 0.9998 | 0.9993 | 0.9991 |
| B–The low-conductivity buffer | |||||
| Half dose | Single dose | 1 min delay | 2 min delay | 3 min delay | |
| S1 | 516.9 ± 3.9 | 965.7 ± 1.7 | 516.9 ± 3.9a | 516.9 ± 3.9a | 445.4 ± 19.4 |
| S2 | / | / | 413.1 ± 4.9 | 269 ± 12.4 | 229.2 ± 10.7 |
| τ1 | 91.6 ± 2.66 | 82.78 ± 0.6 | 91.6 ± 2.66a | 91.6 ± 2.66a | 86.7 ± 4.97 |
| τ2 | / | / | 51.58 ± 3.15 | 65.11 ± 3.40 | 44.95 ± 3.65 |
| k | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0985 ± 0.0293 | 0.1512 ± 0.0556 |
| S2/average(S1) | / | / | 0.86 ± 0.04 ↓ | 0.56 ± 0.03↓ | 0.48 ± 0.03↓ |
| τ2/average(τ1) | / | / | 0.58 ± 0.05 | 0.73 ± 0.06 | 0.50 ± 0.05 |
| R2 | 0.9962 | 0.9997 | 0.9980 | 0.9994 | 0.9996 |
| C–The hyperosmotic buffer | |||||
| Half dose | Single dose | 3 min delay | |||
| S1 | 191 ± 2.4 | 387.7 ± 4.5 | 155.8 ± 27.3 | ||
| S2 | / | / | 86.76 ± 10.28 | ||
| τ1 | 161.1 ± 5.3 | 117.8 ± 4.5 | 124.8 ± 21.2 | ||
| τ2 | / | / | 69.63 ± 12.46 | ||
| k | 0 | 0 | 0.01741 ± 0.0662 | ||
| S2/average(S1) | / | / | 0.50 ± 0.08 ↓ | ||
| τ2/average(τ1) | / | / | 0.49 ± 0.10 | ||
| R2 | 0.9977 | 0.9958 | 0.9992 | ||
| D–The high-conductivity buffer | |||||
| Single dose | 3 min delay | ||||
| S1 | 681.2 ± 9.1 | 369.8 ± 31.4 | |||
| S2 | / | 379.8 ± 8.6 | |||
| τ1 | 57.54 ± 1.54 | 122.2 ± 11.7 | |||
| τ2 | / | 36.68 ± 1.34 | |||
| k | 0.4366 ± 0.0255 | 0.2719 ± 0.0623 | |||
| S2/average(S1) | / | 1.03 ± 0.09 ≈ | |||
| τ2/average(τ1) | / | 0.30 ± 0.10 | |||
| R2 | 0.9992 | 0.9999 | |||
| E–The buffer with calcium | |||||
| Single doseb | 3 min delay | ||||
| S1 | 1129 ± 432 | 365.6 ± 22.4 | |||
| S2 | / | 386.1 ± 22 | |||
| τ1 | 144 ± 55.9 | 79.36 ± 11 | |||
| τ2 | / | 69.86 ± 5.54 | |||
| k | 0 | 0 | |||
| S2/average(S1) | / | 1.06 ± 0.88 ≈ | |||
| τ2/average(τ1) | / | 0.88 ± 0.14 | |||
| R2 | 0.9705 | 0.9974 | |||
a The values for the S1 and τ1 were taken from the results of fitting Eq 2 to the results of the half dose (2nd column) where the plateau of fluorescence was already reached, and the first order shape was clear.
b Here, the first order model was not appropriate since the 95% confidence interval was very large. These parameters do not influence the results of the analysis since the ratios were not calculated from the single dose parameters.