help button home button Biophys. J.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Originally published as Biophys J. BioFAST on January 19, 2007.
doi:10.1529/biophysj.106.099861
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
biophysj.106.099861v1
92/7/2311    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Williams, G. S. B.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, G. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Williams, G. S. B.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, G. D.
Biophysical Journal 92:2311-2328 (2007)
© 2007 The Biophysical Society

A Probability Density Approach to Modeling Local Control of Calcium-Induced Calcium Release in Cardiac Myocytes

George S. B. Williams *, Marco A. Huertas *, Eric A. Sobie {ddagger} §, M. Saleet Jafri {dagger} {ddagger} and Gregory D. Smith *

* Department of Applied Science, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia; {dagger} Department of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, George Mason University, Manassas, Virginia; {ddagger} Medical Biotechnology Center and the Institute of Molecular Cardiology, University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute, Baltimore, Maryland; and § Department of Pediatrics, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York

Correspondence: Address reprint requests to Gregory D. Smith, Dept. of Applied Science, McGlothlin-Street Hall, Rm. 305, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187. E-mail: greg{at}as.wm.edu.


    ABSTRACT
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MODEL FORMULATION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTION OF...
 APPENDIX B: GENERALIZATION OF...
 APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF...
 APPENDIX D: NUMERICAL SCHEME...
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 
We present a probability density approach to modeling localized Ca2+ influx via L-type Ca2+ channels and Ca2+-induced Ca2+ release mediated by clusters of ryanodine receptors during excitation-contraction coupling in cardiac myocytes. Coupled advection-reaction equations are derived relating the time-dependent probability density of subsarcolemmal subspace and junctional sarcoplasmic reticulum [Ca2+] conditioned on "Ca2+ release unit" state. When these equations are solved numerically using a high-resolution finite difference scheme and the resulting probability densities are coupled to ordinary differential equations for the bulk myoplasmic and sarcoplasmic reticulum [Ca2+], a realistic but minimal model of cardiac excitation-contraction coupling is produced. Modeling Ca2+ release unit activity using this probability density approach avoids the computationally demanding task of resolving spatial aspects of global Ca2+ signaling, while accurately representing heterogeneous local Ca2+ signals in a population of diadic subspaces and junctional sarcoplasmic reticulum depletion domains. The probability density approach is validated for a physiologically realistic number of Ca2+ release units and benchmarked for computational efficiency by comparison to traditional Monte Carlo simulations. In simulated voltage-clamp protocols, both the probability density and Monte Carlo approaches to modeling local control of excitation-contraction coupling produce high-gain Ca2+ release that is graded with changes in membrane potential, a phenomenon not exhibited by so-called "common pool" models. However, a probability density calculation can be significantly faster than the corresponding Monte Carlo simulation, especially when cellular parameters are such that diadic subspace [Ca2+] is in quasistatic equilibrium with junctional sarcoplasmic reticulum [Ca2+] and, consequently, univariate rather than multivariate probability densities may be employed.


    INTRODUCTION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MODEL FORMULATION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTION OF...
 APPENDIX B: GENERALIZATION OF...
 APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF...
 APPENDIX D: NUMERICAL SCHEME...
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 
The mechanical function of the heart depends on complex bidirectional interactions between electrical and calcium (Ca2+) signaling systems. Each time the heart beats, current flowing through the ion channels in the plasma membrane (sarcolemma) causes a characteristic change in membrane voltage known as an action potential (AP). Membrane depolarization during the AP causes L-type Ca2+ channels to open, and Ca2+ current through these channels causes the release of a larger amount of Ca2+ from the sarcoplasmic reticulum, a process known as Ca2+-induced Ca2+ release (CICR). This leads to a large, transient increase in [Ca2+] in each heart cell, and contraction occurs when these Ca2+ ions bind to myofilaments, a sequence of events known as excitation-contraction (EC) coupling. In addition, intracellular [Ca2+] feeds back upon and changes the cell's membrane potential through the Ca2+ dependence of several ion channels and membrane transporters.

Mathematical and computational modeling has proved to be an important tool for understanding cardiac electrophysiology and EC coupling. Computer simulations have been used to test hypotheses about heart cell function and predict underlying mechanisms (1Go–4Go). Most investigations have employed deterministic models that ignore molecular fluctuations and assume an isopotential cell, an approach that is valid for simulating current flowing through a large population of voltage-gated ion channels. Even though the individual channels open and close stochastically, each channel experiences the same voltage, so identical rate constants apply to each channel and only average behavior needs to be considered. However, this approach is not suitable for simulating CICR release during EC coupling because the overall release flux represents a collection of discrete events, known as Ca2+ sparks, evoked by local—rather than global—increases in Ca2+ concentration (5Go). That is, each spark reflects Ca2+ release from a cluster of Ca2+-regulated intracellular Ca2+ channels known as ryanodine receptors (RyRs) that is triggered by entry of Ca2+ through nearby L-type Ca2+ channels (6Go). Thus, different groups of RyRs experience different local Ca2+ concentrations and stochastically gate in a manner that depends on whether nearby sarcolemmal Ca2+ channels have recently been open or closed. One consequence of this "local control" (7Go) mechanism of cardiac CICR is that deterministic "common pool" models—whole cell models in which all RyR clusters in a myocyte experience the same [Ca2+]—fail to reproduce several important experimental observations. In particular, the high gain and positive feedback of common pool models ensures that Ca2+ is released in an all-or-none fashion (2Go,3Go,8Go–10Go) as opposed to being graded with the amount of Ca2+ influx, as observed in numerous experiments (6Go,11Go,12Go). Deterministic common pool models of cardiac CICR during EC coupling that have been able to reproduce graded release have done so in an ad hoc fashion (4Go,13Go–16Go).

Models of EC coupling are able to simulate graded Ca2+ release mechanistically by treating L-type Ca2+ channels and juxtaposed Ca2+ release sites as stochastic "Ca2+ release units" (CaRUs), each of which is associated with its own diadic subspace Ca2+ concentration. When activated spontaneously or through membrane depolarization these CaRUs may deplete Ca2+ stored in localized regions of junctional SR and, on a slower timescale, interact with one another via diffusion of Ca2+ within the network SR and bulk myoplasm. This approach, however, requires relatively large computational resources to perform Monte-Carlo simulations of stochastic Ca2+ release from a large population of CaRUs. Indeed, the number of simulated CaRUs is often reduced to unphysiological values in such models to obtain shorter run times (7Go,17Go–19Go).

Two recent deterministic models have used a minimal Ca2+ release unit formulation of interactions between L-type channels and RyR clusters to produce graded release (20Go,21Go). In these models ordinary differential equations for the fraction of Ca2+ release units in each of a small number of states are solved under the assumption that subspace [Ca2+] is an algebraic function of the bulk myoplasmic and network SR [Ca2+]. This function depends on Ca2+ release unit state and is determined by balancing the Ca2+ fluxes into and out of the diadic subspace. While the large number of Ca2+ release units in cardiac myocytes—estimated in the range of 10,000–20,000 via both structural (22Go) and functional (23Go) observations—does indeed suggest that it should be possible to produce deterministic local control models of EC coupling, the assumption that diadic subspace [Ca2+] is in quasistatic equilibrium with bulk myoplasmic and network SR Ca2+ may be overly restrictive. Indeed, this modeling approach is only valid when the dynamics of subspace [Ca2+] are very fast compared to stochastic Ca2+ release unit transition rates. Moreover, [Ca2+] in a particular subspace is likely to depend on the local "junctional" SR [Ca2+] rather than the bulk or network SR [Ca2+], especially if junctional SR depletion influences RyR gating, as suggested by both simulations (18Go) and recent experiments (24Go,25Go).

Here we present an alternative deterministic formalism for modeling local control of CICR during cardiac EC coupling that captures the collective behavior of a large population of Ca2+ release units without this restrictive assumption. We utilize the fact that the number of Ca2+ release units is large (similar to Hinch (20Go) and Greenstein et al. (21Go)), but we do not assume a simple algebraic relationship between the local diadic subspace [Ca2+] associated with each Ca2+ release unit and the bulk Ca2+ concentrations. Instead, we define a set of multivariate continuous probability density functions for the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+] conditioned on CaRU state (26Go–28Go). As described below, these probability density functions solve a system of advection-reaction equations that are derived from the stochastic ordinary differential equations used in Monte Carlo simulations of local control. These equations are solved numerically using a high-resolution finite difference scheme while coupled to ordinary differential equations for the bulk myoplasmic and network SR [Ca2+]. This produces a minimal model of cardiac EC coupling that avoids computationally demanding Monte Carlo simulation while accurately representing heterogeneous local Ca2+ signals; in particular, the statistical recruitment of CaRUs and the dynamics of junctional SR depletion, spark termination, and junctional SR refilling.

Some of these results have previously appeared in abstract form (29Go).


    MODEL FORMULATION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MODEL FORMULATION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTION OF...
 APPENDIX B: GENERALIZATION OF...
 APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF...
 APPENDIX D: NUMERICAL SCHEME...
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 
The minimal whole cell model of cardiac EC coupling that is the focus of this article can be formulated as a traditional Monte Carlo calculation in which heterogeneous local Ca2+ signals associated with a large number of CaRUs are simulated. In this Monte Carlo formulation, a diadic subspace and junctional SR compartment is associated with each CaRU and the [Ca2+] in these compartments is found by solving a large number of ordinary differential equations. Alternatively, these heterogeneous local Ca2+ signals can be simulated using a novel probability density approach that represents the distribution of diadic subspace and junctional SR Ca2+ concentrations with a system of partial differential equations (see below). Because many of the equations and parameters of the whole cell model of EC coupling are identical in the two formulations, we begin by presenting the Monte Carlo formulation.

Whole cell model of EC coupling: Monte Carlo formulation
Fig. 1 shows a diagram of the components and fluxes of the model of local Ca2+ signaling and CaRU activity during cardiac EC coupling that is the focus of this article. As illustrated in Fig. 1 A, each Ca2+ release unit includes two restricted compartments (the diadic subspace and junctional SR) with [Ca2+] denoted by Formula, respectively, where the superscripted n is an index over a total number of Ca2+ release units (denoted by N). Each Ca2+ release unit includes an L-type Ca2+ channel dihydropiridine receptor (DHPR) and a minimal representation of a cluster of RyRs that is either fully closed or fully open. The fluxes Formula indicate Ca2+ entry into a subspace via the DHPR or RyR cluster, respectively. Diffusion of Ca2+ between the nth diadic subspace and bulk myoplasm (cmyo) is indicated by Formula. Similarly, Formula indicates diffusion between the network SR (cnsr) and junctional SR compartment associated with the nth Ca2+ release unit.


Figure 1
View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 1  Diagrams of model components and fluxes. (A) Each Ca2+ release unit consists of two restricted compartments (the diadic subspace and junctional SR with [Ca2+] denoted by cds and cjsr, respectively), a two-state L-type Ca2+ channel (DHPR), and a two-state Ca2+ release site (a RyR "megachannel" (18Go)). The t-tubular [Ca2+] is denoted by cext and the fluxes Formula, Formula, Formula, Formula, Jin, Jncx, Jserca, and Jleak are described in the text. (B) The bulk myoplasm (cmyo) and network SR (cnsr) Ca2+ concentrations in the model are coupled via Formula to a large number of Ca2+ release units (for clarity only four are shown), each with different diadic subspace (Formula) and junctional SR (Formula) Ca2+ concentration.

 
Fig. 1 B illustrates how the bulk myoplasm and network SR Ca2+ concentrations in the model are coupled via the diffusion fluxes (Formula) to a large number of Ca2+ release units (for clarity only four are shown). Importantly, each of the N Ca2+ release units may have a different diadic subspace (Formula) and junctional SR (Formula) Ca2+ concentration. Four additional fluxes directly influence the bulk myoplasm: a background Ca2+ influx denoted by Jin, extrusion of Ca2+ via the Na+-Ca2+ exchanger (Jncx), SR Ca2+-ATPase (SERCA) pumps (Jserca) that resequester Ca2+ into the network SR, and a passive leak out of the network SR to the bulk myoplasm (Jleak).

A complete description of CICR would include stochastic gating of roughly N = 20,000 CaRUs, each of which would contain multiple L-type Ca2+ channels (1Go–10Go) (30Go) and RyRs (30–300) (31Go), with each individual channel described by a Markov chain that consists of two to several tens of states. However, previous Monte Carlo simulations of EC coupling focusing on local control have often used Markov models of reduced complexity (7Go,18Go,20Go). Because such minimal models capture the essential characteristics of EC coupling gain and gradedness in simulated whole cell voltage clamp protocols, this level of resolution will suffice for our main purpose, which is to introduce the probability density approach as an alternative to Monte Carlo simulation.

A minimal four-state Ca2+ release unit model
Previous modeling studies indicate that the gating of the cluster of RyRs associated with each CaRU is all-or-none (7Go,17Go,18Go) and this suggests the following minimal two-state model of an RyR "megachannel",

Formula 1,(1)
where the Ca2+ activation of the cluster of RyRs is a sigmoidal function of the diadic subspace [Ca2+] (18Go),

Formula
and the influence of junctional SR [Ca2+] on RyR gating is included by making the half-maximal activation of the RyR megachannel (Kryr) a decreasing function of Formula,

Formula
so that depletion of the junctional SR will render CaRUs refractory to activation after release terminates (18Go).

Similarly, to illustrate and validate the probability density approach it is sufficient to consider a two-state model of the L-type Ca2+ channel (DHPR),

Formula 2,(2)
with a voltage-dependent activation rate Formula given by (4Go)

Formula
and constant deactivation rate Formula that sets the mean open time (0.2 ms) and maximum open probability (0.1) of the channel. Although this two-state DHPR model ignores voltage- and Ca2+-dependent inactivation of L-type Ca2+ channels, these processes do not significantly influence the triggering of CICR during the whole-cell voltage clamp protocols that are the focus of this article (cf. Hinch (20Go)).

When the kinetic schemes of the RyR megachannel and DHPR (Eqs. 1 and 2) are combined we obtain the following minimal four-state model of a Ca2+ release unit,

Formula 3(3)
where the horizontal transitions represent RyR opening and closing whereas vertical transitions represent DHPR gating.

Concentration balance equations
In the Monte Carlo formulation of the minimal whole cell model of EC coupling there are 2 + 2N ordinary differential equations representing Ca2+ concentration balance for the bulk myoplasm, network SR, N diadic subspaces, and N junctional SRs. Consistent with Fig. 1 these equations are

Formula 4(4)

Formula 5(5)

Formula 6(6)

Formula 7(7)
where 1 ≤ n ≤ N in Eqs. 5 and 6 and the total efflux and refill fluxes occurring in Eqs. 4 and 7 include a contribution from each CaRU and thus are given by Formula 7 and Formula 7. Similarly, the total (trigger) flux via DHPR channels and the total release flux via RyR megachannels throughout the whole cell model are given by

Formula 8(8)

The effective volume ratios {lambda}nsr, {lambda}ds, and {lambda}jsr in Eqs. 57 are defined with respect to the physical volume (Vmyo) and include a constant-fraction Ca2+ buffer capacity for the myoplasm (βmyo). For example, the effective volume ratio associated with the network SR is

Formula 8
with effective volumes defined by Formula 8 and Formula 8. Because each individual diadic subspace is assumed to have the same physical volume (Vds) and buffering capacity (βds), the effective volume ratio that occurs in Eq. 5 is

Formula 9(9)
where the second expression defines {lambda}ds in terms of the total physical volume of all the diadic subspaces in aggregate (Formula 9). Similar assumptions and equations apply for the junctional SR so that the definition of {lambda}jsr follows Eq. 9.

We also define an overall myoplasmic [Ca2+] that includes contributions from the bulk myoplasm and each of the N diadic spaces (scaled by their effective volumes),

Formula 10(10)
where the second equality uses natural definitions for the total effective diadic subspace volume, Formula 10, and the average diadic subspace [Ca2+],

Formula 11(11)

Similarly, the overall SR [Ca2+] involves both the junctional and network SR,

Formula 12(12)
where Formula 12, Formula 12, and the average junctional SR [Ca2+] is defined as Formula 12.

Description of fluxes
The trigger Ca2+ flux into each of the N diadic spaces through DHPR channels (Formula 12 in Eq. 5) is given by

Formula 13(13)
where Am = Cmβmyo/Vmyo. The inward Ca2+ current (Formula 13) is given by

Formula 14(14)
where V{theta} = RT/zF, Formula 14 is the total (whole cell) permeability of the L-type Ca2+ channels, and Formula 14 is a random variable that is 0 when the L-type Ca2+ channel associated with the nth CaRU is closed and 1 when this channel is open (Eqs. 2 and 3).

Similarly, the flux through the RyR megachannel associated with the nth CaRU (Formula 14) is given by

Formula 15(15)
where Formula 15 = 0 or 1 when the release site is closed or open, respectively (Eqs. 1 and 3). Diffusion from each subspace into the bulk myoplasm is given by

Formula 16(16)
and, similarly, diffusion from the network SR to each junctional SR compartment is given by

Formula 17(17)

The remaining four fluxes that appear in Eqs. 46 include Jin (background Ca2+ influx), Jncx (Na+-Ca2+ exchange), Jserca (SR Ca2+-ATPases), and Jleak (the network SR leak). The functional form of these four fluxes that directly influence the bulk myoplasmic [Ca2+] follows previous work (3Go,32Go,33Go) (see Appendix A).

Whole cell model of EC coupling: probability density formulation
The probability density approach to modeling local Ca2+ signaling and CaRU activity during cardiac EC coupling is an alternative to Monte Carlo simulation that is valid when the number of Ca2+ release units is large. We begin by defining continuous multivariate probability density functions for the diadic subspace (Formula 17) and junctional SR (Formula 17) Ca2+ concentrations jointly distributed with the state of the Ca2+ release unit (Formula 17) (34Go,35Go,26Go), that is,

Formula 18(18)
where the index Formula 18 runs over the four Ca2+ release unit states (see Eq. 3) and the tildes on Formula 18, Formula 18, and Formula 18 indicate random quantities. If the meaning of Eq. 18 is not obvious, it may be helpful to imagine performing a Monte Carlo simulation as described in the previous section with a very large number of CaRUs. At any time t one could randomly sample one CaRU from this population to produce an instance of the random variables Formula 18, Formula 18, and Formula 18, corresponding to the current state of the sampled L-type channel and RyR cluster and the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+] associated with this CaRU. The quantity {rho}i(cds, cjsr, t) defined in Eq. 18 simply indicates the probability with which you would find this sampled CaRU in state i with diadic subspace [Ca2+] in the range [cds, cds + dcds] and junctional SR [Ca2+] in the range [cjsr, cjsr + dcjsr] provided the total number of CaRUs is very large.

For the multivariate probability densities defined by Eq. 18 to be consistent with the dynamics of the Monte Carlo model of cardiac EC coupling described in the previous section, they must satisfy the following system of advection-reaction equations (26Go–28Go),

Formula 19(19)

Formula 20(20)

Formula 21(21)

Formula 22(22)
where the advection rates Formula 22 are functions of cds and cjsr that can be read off the ordinary differential equations for the evolution the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+]. Consistent with Eqs. 5 and 6 we have

Formula 23(23)

Formula 24(24)
where Formula 24 indicates whether or not the L-type Ca2+ channel is open (Formula 24, Formula 24) and, similarly, Formula 24 indicates whether or not the RyR channel cluster is open (Formula 24, Formula 24). Eqs. 23 and 24 include four fluxes that may influence the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+] and consistent with Eqs. 1317 these are given by

Formula 25(25)

Formula 26(26)

Formula 27(27)

Formula 28(28)

The advection terms in Eqs. 1922 involving partial derivatives with respect to cds and cjsr correspond to the deterministic dynamics of diadic subspace and junctional SR Ca2+ that depend on Ca2+ release unit state via Formula 28 and Formula 28 (Eqs. 5 and 6). Conversely, the reaction terms in Eqs. 19 and 22 correspond to the stochastic gating of the four-state Ca2+ release unit model whose transition rates are presented above (Eqs. 13). That is, Ca2+ release unit state changes move probability from one joint probability density to another in a manner that may [Formula 28] or may not [Formula 28, Formula 28, and Formula 28] depend on the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+].

It is important to note that the functional form of the fluxes Formula 28 and Formula 28 occurring in Eqs. 23 and 24 involve the bulk myoplasmic and network SR Ca2+ concentrations (cmyo(t) and cnsr(t) in Eqs. 26 and 27). These bulk Ca2+ concentrations satisfy ordinary differential equations (ODEs) that are similar in form to the concentration balance equations used in the Monte Carlo approach (Eqs. 4 and 7),

Formula 29(29)

Formula 30(30)
where Jleak, Jncx, Jserca, and Jin are defined as in the Monte Carlo approach (see Appendix A), but Jefflux* and Jrefill* are functionals of the probability densities [{rho}i(cds, cjsr, t)] governed by Eqs. 1922, that is,

Formula 31(31)

Formula 32(32)
where Formula 32 is the total probability distribution of the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+] irrespective of the state of a randomly sampled CaRU, and the double integrals account for all possible values of diadic and junctional SR [Ca2+].

Summary of model formulation
The probability density and Monte Carlo formulations of the minimal model of EC coupling presented above have much in common. For example, the dynamics of the bulk myoplasmic and network SR [Ca2+] take similar forms (compare Eqs. 29 and 30 to Eqs. 4 and 7). However, the two approaches differ fundamentally in how the heterogeneous localized Ca2+ concentrations associated with a large number of Ca2+ release units are represented. In the traditional Monte Carlo simulation, 2N ordinary differential equations are solved to determine the dynamics of [Ca2+] in the diadic subspace and junctional SR compartments associated with N Ca2+ release units (Eqs. 5 and 6). In the probability density formulation, time-dependent multivariate probability densities for the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+] jointly distributed with CaRU state are updated by solving four coupled advection-reaction equations (Eqs. 1922), one for each state of the chosen CaRU model (Eq. 3). Further details of the probability density approach are presented in Appendices B–D.


    RESULTS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MODEL FORMULATION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTION OF...
 APPENDIX B: GENERALIZATION OF...
 APPENDIX C: DERIVATION OF...
 APPENDIX D: NUMERICAL SCHEME...
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 
In the following sections, traditional Monte Carlo simulations of voltage-clamp protocols using the minimal whole cell model of EC coupling presented above are shown to produce high-gain Ca2+ release that is graded with changes in membrane potential, a phenomenon not exhibited by so-called "common pool" models of excitation-contraction coupling. Analysis of these Monte Carlo results suggests a simplification of the advection-reaction equations that form the basis of the probability density approach. This reduced probability density formulation is subsequently validated against, and benchmarked for computational efficiency by comparison to, traditional Monte Carlo simulations.

Representative Monte Carlo simulations
Fig. 2 A shows representative Monte Carlo simulations of the minimal whole cell model of EC coupling presented above (Eqs. 117 and Appendix A). In this simulated voltage-clamp protocol, the holding potential of –80 mV is followed by a 20-ms duration test potential to –30, –20, and –10 mV (dotted, dot-dashed, and solid lines, respectively). Because these simulations involve a large but finite number of Ca2+ release units (N = 5000), the resulting Ca2+ influx through L-type Ca2+ channels (Formula 32), elevation in the average diadic subspace concentration (Formula 32), and the induced Ca2+ release flux (Formula 32) are erratic functions of time. As expected, the test potential of –10 mV leads to greater Ca2+ influx, higher diadic subspace [Ca2+], and more Ca2+ release than the test potentials of –30 and –20 mV. When the test potential is –10 mV a 30x "gain" is observed, here defined as the ratio Formula 32 where the overbar indicates an average over the duration of the pulse. Importantly, Ca2+ release exhibited by this Monte Carlo model is graded with changes in membrane potential (compare traces) and depolarization duration (not shown), phenomena that are not exhibited by common pool models of excitation-contraction coupling.


Figure 2
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 2  (A) Monte Carlo simulation of the whole cell model exhibits graded release during step depolarization from a holding potential of –80 mV to –30, –20, and –10 mV (dotted, dot-dashed, and solid lines, respectively). From top to bottom: command voltage, average diadic subspace [Ca2+] (Formula 32, Eq. 11), total Ca2+ flux via L-type PM Ca2+ channels (Formula 32, Eqs. 8, 13, and 14), and total Ca2+-induced Ca2+ release flux (Formula 32, Eqs. 8 and 15). The simulation used N = 5000 Ca2+ release units. (B) Monte Carlo simulations similar to panel A except that the step potential is –10 (solid lines) and +10 mV (dotted lines), respectively. Here and below parameters are as in Tables 13Go.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 1  Model parameters: volume fractions, Ca2+ buffering, and exchange between restricted domains and the bulk, physical constants, and fixed ion concentrations

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 3  Model parameters: Na+-Ca2+ exchange current, SERCA pumps, and background Ca2+ influx

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 2  Ca2+ release unit parameters (L-type Ca2+ channel and RyR cluster)

 
Figs. 2 B shows a direct comparison between test potentials of –10 and 10 mV. These test potentials result in nearly identical whole cell Ca2+ currents (averaged over the duration of the pulse, Formula 32 = 1.6 and 1.4 µM/s, respectively). In spite of this, the induced Ca2+ release flux is significantly greater when the test potential is –10 mV (Formula 32 = 47 µM/s) as opposed to 10 mV (21 µM/s). This phenomenon occurs because the L-type channel open probability is greater at 10 mV than –10 mV (Eq. 2), while the driving force for Ca2+ ions is reduced (Eqs. 13 and 14). Although the overall trigger Ca2+ flux is nearly the same at these two test potentials, Ca2+ release is more effectively induced when the trigger Ca2+ is apportioned in larger quantities among a smaller number of diadic subspaces, because the influx that does occur is then more likely to trigger Ca2+ sparks. This physiologically realistic aspect of local control during EC coupling is observed in Monte Carlo simulations (see also (19Go,21Go)), but cannot be reproduced by common pool models (7Go), nor is it seen in models in which SR Ca2+ release depends explicitly on whole-cell Ca2+ current (e.g., (16Go)).

The solid lines of Fig. 3 show [Ca2+] in the bulk myoplasm (cmyo) and network SR (cnsr) during and after the –10 mV voltage pulse (note change in timescale). Approximately 400 ms is required for the bulk myoplasm and network SR concentrations to return to resting levels. Note that although the voltage pulse ends at t = 30 ms, the bulk myoplasmic [Ca2+] continues to increase for ~20 ms. Similarly, the network SR [Ca2+] concentration continues to decrease until t = 80 ms.


Figure 3
View larger version (7K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 3  Solid lines show the dynamics of bulk myoplasmic (cmyo) and network SR (cnsr) [Ca2+] in the whole cell voltage clamp protocol of Fig. 2 with step potential of –10 mV (note longer timescale). Dashed lines show the overall myoplasmic (Formula 32, Eq. 10) and network SR (Formula 32, Eq. 12) [Ca2+] that include contributions from diadic subspaces and junctional SR, respectively. Note that Formula 32 is only slightly greater than cmyo and the two traces are not distinguishable.

 
The dashed line of Fig. 3 shows that the total SR [Ca2+] including both network and junctional SR (Eq. 12) is transiently less than the network SR [Ca2+] (Formula 32), reflecting the fact that for several hundred milliseconds after the voltage pulse junctional SR Ca2+ is depleted. While the ratio between the total junctional SR effective volume and the network SR effective volume is Formula 32, the corresponding ratio between the total diadic subspace volume and the myoplasmic volume is much smaller (Formula 32). Consequently, the elevated average diadic subspace [Ca2+] during the depolarizing voltage step (Formula 32 µM as shown in Fig. 2) does not significantly increase the overall myoplasmic [Ca2+] (Formula 32 and the two traces overlap in Fig. 3). On the other hand, depleted junctional SR Ca2+ during and after the voltage pulse (Formula 32 µM, not shown) represents a significant depletion of the overall SR Ca2+ content (Formula 32 in Fig. 3). Although junctional SR depletion develops rapidly after the initiation of the voltage pulse, refilling of these compartments via diffusion of Ca2+ from the network SR (Formula 32 in Eq. 6) is not complete until ~400 ms after the termination of the voltage pulse (compare solid and dashed lines).

Dynamics of a representative Ca2+ release unit
Fig. 4 shows the dynamics of an individual Ca2+ release unit from the Monte Carlo simulations above (test potential of –10 mV, solid line of Fig. 2). Fig. 4 A shows the state of this representative Ca2+ release unit and the associated diadic subspace and junctional SR Ca2+ concentrations. When the DHPR initially opens (transition from state Formula 32 in Eq. 3) an influx of trigger Ca2+ leads to ~7 µM increase in diadic subspace [Ca2+] and causes the RyR cluster to open (Formula 32 transition). The resulting Ca2+-induced Ca2+ release quickly drives the diadic subspace [Ca2+] to ~150 µM but over the next 10 ms the resulting decrease in junctional SR [Ca2+] leads to decreasing diadic subspace [Ca2+]. Note that junctional SR depletion is nearly complete in Fig. 4 before the Formula 32 transition that ends Ca2+ release; however, this example is not representative in this regard because most sparks terminate via stochastic attrition whereas depletion is only partial. Superimposed on the gradual decrease in diadic subspace [Ca2+] are square pulses of increased [Ca2+] (±7 µM) due to the stochastic openings of the L-type Ca2+ channel associated with this CaRU (Formula 32 transitions).


Figure 4
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 4  (A) Dynamics of the diadic subspace (Formula 32) and junctional SR (Formula 32) Ca2+ concentrations associated with a single Ca2+ release unit during the voltage clamp protocol of Figs. 2 and 3. (B) The dynamics of these local Ca2+ concentrations in the (cds,cjsr)-plane. Trajectory color indicates CaRU state: both the L-type channel and the RyR cluster closed (Formula 32, black); L-type channel open and RyR cluster closed (Formula 32, green); L-type channel closed and RyR cluster open (Formula 32, blue); both the L-type channel and the RyR cluster open (Formula 32, red). Colored dashed lines correspond to estimates of diadic subspace [Ca2+] given by Eq. 33.

 
The observation that diadic subspace [Ca2+] decreases during the voltage pulse suggests that its dynamics are fast compared to the time evolution of junctional SR [Ca2+]. In fact, for the physiologically realistic parameters used in Figs. 24Go, the diadic subspace [Ca2+] (Formula 32) is well approximated by assuming quasistatic equilibrium with the junctional SR (Formula 32), bulk myoplasmic (cmyo), and network SR (cnsr) Ca2+ concentrations. Setting the Formula 32/dt = 0 in Eq. 5 and solving for Formula 32 we find that

Formula 33(33)
where Formula 33 and Formula 33 depend on Ca2+ release unit state and Formula 33 and Formula 33 are functions of plasma membrane voltage defined by Formula 33 with Formula 33 as in Eq. 28.

Fig. 4 B replots the dynamics of the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+] shown in Fig. 4 A in the (cds, cjsr)-plane. The black arrows indicate the direction of the trajectories and color of the solid lines indicates CaRU state (Formula 33, black; Formula 33, green; Formula 33, red; Formula 33, blue). The diagonal trajectory is one consequence of diadic subspace [Ca2+] being "slaved" to junctional SR [Ca2+] as the junctional SR depletes. The four colored dotted lines correspond to the four functional relationships between Formula 33 and Formula 33 given by Eq. 33 (one for each CaRU state). The dynamics of diadic subspace [Ca2+] (solid lines) are well approximated by these dotted lines (save for short time intervals immediately following CaRU state transitions), demonstrating the validity of the quasistatic approximation leading to Eq. 33.

Dynamics of the population of Ca2+ release units
Fig. 4 shows the dynamics of the diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+] associated with a single Ca2+ release unit during a voltage clamp step (Figs. 2 and 3). Conversely, Fig. 5 presents the state of each of the 5000 CaRUs at a particular moment in time (t = 30 ms, halfway through the test potential of –10 mV). To interpret this figure, it is important to understand that the four central panels of Fig. 5 correspond to the four CaRU states and are arranged in a manner corresponding to the transition state diagram of Eq. 3. At this moment during the simulation, ~5% of the Ca2+ release units have open L-type channels (Formula 33) whereas ~30% have an open RyR cluster (Formula 33). Note that for each of the four subpopulations of CaRUs there is a linear relationship between cds and cjsr, that is, the open circles tend to be arranged in lines, the position of which depends on CaRU state (and the slope of which depends on whether or not the RyR cluster is open). Thus, Fig. 5 demonstrates that across the entire population of Ca2+ release units, the observed diadic subspace [Ca2+] is well approximated by the quasistatic approximation given by Eq. 33.


Figure 5
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 5  The open circles are a snapshot at t = 30 ms of the diadic subspace (Formula 33) and junctional SR (Formula 33) Ca2+ concentrations in the Monte Carlo simulation of Fig. 2. Each of the four central panels corresponds to a particular Ca2+ release unit state and size of each subpopulation at this moment is indicated by Formula 33 through Formula 33. The horizontally (vertically) oriented histograms give the marginal distribution of diadic subspace (junctional SR) [Ca2+] conditioned on CaRU state. Histograms are scaled for clarity and in some cases also truncated (asterisks).

 
Fig. 5 also shows histograms of the observed distribution of diadic subspace [Ca2+] (horizontal) and junctional SR [Ca2+] (vertical). The histograms associated with CaRU state Formula 33 clearly indicate that most of these 3387 CaRUs have replete junctional SR (Formula 33), something that is not obvious from the open circles in the (cds, cjsr)-plane. Similarly, most of the 154 CaRUs in state Formula 33 are associated with replete junctional SR. Conversely, the junctional SR [Ca2+] for the 1369 CaRUs in state Formula 33 is broadly distributed with the "average" junctional SR severely depleted (~100 µM). At t = 30 ms only 90 CaRUs are in state Formula 33 and the distributions of junctional SR [Ca2+] and diadic subspace [Ca2+] associated with this state are bimodal.

A univariate probability density formulation for junctional SR [Ca2+]
It is important to note that the Monte Carlo simulations presented in Fig. 5 are only a snapshot of the population of 5000 Ca2+ release units. As the simulation progresses, imagine the open circles moving around in these four (cds, cjsr)-planes consistent with Eqs. 5 and 6 with occasional jumps from one plane to another when a CaRU changes state. These four planes are analogous to the four time-dependent joint probability densities that form the basis of the probability density approach presented above (Eq. 18).

The observation that the diadic subspace [Ca2+] is well approximated by Eq. 33 across the entire population of Ca2+ release units (Fig. 5) suggests that the multivariate joint probability density functions defined in Eq. 18 will be well approximated by

Formula 34(34)
where Formula 34 is a function of CaRU state and the junctional SR, bulk myoplasmic, and network SR [Ca2+] analogous to Eq. 33,

Formula 35(35)
where Formula 35, Formula 35, Formula 35, and Formula 35 are as defined in the previous section. The univariate probability density Formula 35(cjsr, t) that appears in Eq. 34 is the marginal density of the junctional SR [Ca2+] jointly distributed with CaRU state defined by

Formula 36(36)
That is, when the observed form of the joint multivariate probability densities (Eq. 34) is integrated with respect to diadic subspace [Ca2+] we obtain

Formula 37(37)
where the last equality uses the unit mass of the {delta} function, Formula 37.

As shown in Appendix C, the observed form of the multivariate probability densities (Eq. 34) and the definition of the marginal density (first equality in Eq. 37) can be used to reduce Eqs. 1922 into a univariate version of the probability density formulation that focuses on the dynamics of the marginal densities for the junctional SR [Ca2+] jointly distributed with CaRU state [Formula 37(cjsr, t)]. The resulting advection-reaction equations are (26Go–28Go),

Formula 38(38)

Formula 39(39)

Formula 40(40)

Formula 41(41)
where the advection rates Formula 41, Formula 41, Formula 41, and Formula 41 are given by Eq. 24 with the substitution of Formula 41 for cds, that is,

Formula 42(42)

Formula 43(43)
where Formula 43 is the function of cmyo(t), cjsr, and CaRU state (i) given by Eq. 35.

In this univariate probability density formulation, the bulk myoplasmic and network SR [Ca2+] are still given by Eqs. 29 and 30, but Jefflux* and Jrefill* are now functionals of the joint marginal probability densities [Formula 43(cjsr, t)],

Formula 44(44)

Formula 45(45)

Comparison of probability density and Monte Carlo results
The four histograms presented in Fig. 6, AD, show the marginal distributions of junctional SR [Ca2+] observed in Fig. 5 on identical scales. When presented in this fashion it becomes apparent that at t = 30 ms only a small fraction (~5%) of the Ca2+ release units have open L-type Ca2+ channels (states Formula 45 and Formula 45), while ~30% contain open RyR clusters (Formula 45). Note that in Fig. 6 A the histogram bin representing Ca2+ release units with closed L-type Ca2+ channel, closed RyR cluster, and replete junctional SR is truncated; in fact, ~80% of CaRUs in state Formula 45 have Formula 45. With this understanding, a comparison of Fig. 6, A and B, shows that CaRUs with open RyR clusters are more likely to be depleted than CaRUs with closed RyR clusters, but CaRUs with closed RyR clusters are not necessarily replete, because recovery of junctional SR [Ca2+] is not complete until ~400 ms after RyR closure (cf. Fig. 3).


Figure 6
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 6  Histograms of the junctional SR Ca2+ concentrations (Formula 45) at t = 30 ms in the Monte Carlo simulation of Figs. 25GoGo jointly distributed with CaRU state. These histograms are plotted on the same scale, but one is truncated for clarity. For comparison, the solid lines show the four joint probability densities Formula 45, Formula 45, Formula 45, and Formula 45 for junctional SR [Ca2+] (Eq. 34) calculated via numerical solution of Eqs. 29, 30, and 3845. The probability density calculation of the fraction of subunits in each of the four states is denoted by {pi}i (Eq. 46).

 
The solid lines of Fig. 6, AD, show snapshots of the four joint probability densities Formula 45, Formula 45, Formula 45, and Formula 45 as calculated using the probability density approach (t = 30 ms). These results were obtained by numerically solving Eqs. 29, 30, and 3845 using the numerical scheme presented in Appendix D (parameters as in Figs. 25GoGo). Importantly, the entire distribution of junctional SR Ca2+ concentrations observed for each CaRU state in the probability density calculation (solid lines) agrees with the corresponding Monte Carlo result (histograms), thereby validating the probability density methodology and our implementation of both approaches. In particular, notice that the fraction of CaRUs in each state given by

Formula 46(46)
in the probability density calculation is consistent with the Monte Carlo simulation Fig. 5, for example, in Fig. 6 A Formula 46 and this corresponds to Formula 46 in Fig. 5 A.

While Fig. 6 shows the four marginal probability densities [Formula 46(cjsr, t)] for the junctional SR [Ca2+] jointly distributed with CaRU state at a particular moment in time, Fig. 7 A shows the total probability density

Formula 47(47)
evolving over time. Initially the mass of this probability density is concentrated at cjsr {approx} 1000 µM (a in Fig. 7). During the 20-ms voltage pulse, a significant fraction of the probability density (~65%) moves to junctional SR Ca2+ concentrations that are more than half-depleted (b), while ~35% remains above 500 µM. Interestingly, the probability density remains bimodal for ~200 ms after the voltage pulse ends (c and d). During this time, the probability mass that corresponds to depleted junctional SR (c) gradually moves to higher values of cjsr as these junctional SR compartments are refilled via Ca2+ transport from the network SR. At the same time, the probability mass that corresponds to replete junctional SR compartments (d) follows the network SR [Ca2+] that decreases from t = 30–100 ms and increases again when t > 100 ms (recall the solid line in Fig. 3). Perhaps most importantly, Fig. 7 shows that the shape and temporal evolution of the distributions that form the basis of the probability density approach can be quite complicated.


Figure 7
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 7  Waterfall plot (A) and snapshots (B) of the time evolution of the total probability density for the junctional SR [Ca2+] ({rho}T(cjsr, t) given by Eq. 47) calculated via numerical solution of Eqs. 29, 30, and 3845. The solid black lines show the 20-ms voltage step to –10 mV. See text for description of ad.

 
Monte Carlo simulations converge to the probability density result
The coupled system of advection-reaction equations used in the univariate probability density approach (Eqs. 3841) are the master equations for the marginal probability densities for junctional SR [Ca2+] jointly distributed with the Ca2+ release unit state (Eq. 36). Solving these partial differential equations is equivalent to performing Monte Carlo simulation of diadic subspace [Ca2+], junctional SR [Ca2+], and CaRU state provided that: 1), diadic subspace [Ca2+] is a fast dynamic variable in quasistatic equilibrium with junctional SR [Ca2+]; and 2), the number of Ca2+ release units (N) is large enough. Fig. 6 demonstrates agreement between probability density simulations of a minimal whole cell model of EC coupling and corresponding Monte Carlo simulations using N = 5000 CaRUs. Because this agreement will only improve when the number of CaRUs is increased to physiologically realistic values (N = 20,000), the probability density approach is clearly a viable method of modeling heterogeneous diadic subspace and junctional SR [Ca2+] during EC coupling.

Fig. 8 clarifies this point by showing how the total release flux (Formula 47, open squares) observed in Monte Carlo simulation converges to the probability density result (solid lines) as the number of Ca2+ release units is increased from N = 50–20,000. Each panel shows a representative Monte Carlo simulation with voltage step to –10 mV (solid gray line) as well as the mean and standard deviation of 10 trials (open squares and error bars). As expected, the fluctuations in the total release flux decrease in magnitude as the number of CaRUs used in the Monte Carlo calculation increases. Similarly, Fig. 9 shows histograms of the junctional SR [Ca2+] (irrespective of CaRU state) at t = 30 ms in Monte Carlo simulations performed with a greater or lesser number of CaRUs. Notice that the probability density function {rho}T(cjsr, t) (Eq. 47) accurately represents the distribution of junctional SR [Ca2+] so long as the number of CaRUs is 5000 or more. Indeed, in both Figs. 8 and 9 the Monte Carlo simulations are converging to the probability density result well before the Monte Carlo calculations include a physiological number of Ca2+ release units (N = 20,000). This indicates that the probability density approach to modeling local Ca2+ signaling and Ca2+ release unit activity in cardiac myocytes is a viable alternative to Monte Carlo simulation.


Figure 8
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 8  Total Ca2+ release flux (Formula 47) in Monte Carlo simulations utilizing increasing numbers of Ca2+ release units (N = 50, 500, 5000, and 20,000, respectively). Each panel shows a representative Monte Carlo simulation (solid gray line) and the mean and standard deviation of 10 trials (open squares and error bars). The solid lines show the corresponding probability density result (same in each panel).

 

Figure 9
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
FIGURE 9  Histograms of junctional SR [Ca2+] (Formula 47) at t = 30 ms in the Monte Carlo simulations similar to Fig. 5 but with increasing numbers of Ca2+ release units (N = 50, 500, 5000, and 20,000, respectively) One bin representing ~57% probability of a replete junctional SR is truncated for clarity (asterisk). The solid lines show the probability density calculation of {rho}T(cjsr, t) (Eq. 47), the distribution of the total probability density for the junctional SR [Ca2+] (same in each panel).

 
The probability density calculation exhibits gain and gradedness
To further compare the probability density and Monte Carlo approaches, Fig. 10 A summarizes a large number of simulated whole cell voltage clamp protocols such as those presented in Fig.