Dataset Information

Ajay_Bhalla_2004_Feedback_Tuning

ABSTRACT: This model is taken from Ajay SM, Bhalla US. Eur J Neurosci. 2004 Nov;20(10):2671-80. This is the feedback model from Figure 8a. This model originates from BioModels Database: A Database of Annotated Published Models. It is copyright (c) 2005-2011 The BioModels.net Team. To the extent possible under law, all copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this encoded model have been dedicated to the public domain worldwide. Please refer to CC0 Public Domain Dedication for more information. In summary, you are entitled to use this encoded model in absolutely any manner you deem suitable, verbatim, or with modification, alone or embedded it in a larger context, redistribute it, commercially or not, in a restricted way or not.. To cite BioModels Database, please use: Li C, Donizelli M, Rodriguez N, Dharuri H, Endler L, Chelliah V, Li L, He E, Henry A, Stefan MI, Snoep JL, Hucka M, Le Novère N, Laibe C (2010) BioModels Database: An enhanced, curated and annotated resource for published quantitative kinetic models. BMC Syst Biol., 4:92.

SUBMITTER: Sharat Vayttaden

PROVIDER: MODEL9089914876 | BioModels | 2005-01-01

REPOSITORIES: BioModels

ACCESS DATA

Dataset's files

Source:

			Action	DRS
	MODEL9089914876?filename=MODEL9089914876-biopax2.owl	Owl
	MODEL9089914876?filename=MODEL9089914876-biopax3.owl	Owl
	MODEL9089914876?filename=MODEL9089914876.m	Other
	MODEL9089914876?filename=MODEL9089914876.pdf	Pdf
	MODEL9089914876?filename=MODEL9089914876.png	Other

Items per page:

1 - 5 of 11

Publications

A role for ERKII in synaptic pattern selectivity on the time-scale of minutes.

Ajay Sriram M SM Bhalla Upinder S US

The European journal of neuroscience 20041101 10

Stimulus reinforcement strengthens learning. Intervals between reinforcement affect both the kind of learning that occurs and the amount of learning. Stimuli spaced by a few minutes result in more effective learning than when massed together. There are several synaptic correlates of repeated stimuli, such as different kinds of plasticity and the amplitude of synaptic change. Here we study the role of signalling pathways in the synapse on this selectivity for spaced stimuli. Using the in vitro hi ...[more]

PMID: 15548210

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: The microbiome is increasingly being linked to cancer risk. Little is known about the lung and oral cavity microbiomes in healthy smokers (SM), and even less for electronic cigarette (EC) users, compared healthy never-smokers (NS). Methods: In a cross-sectional pilot study of SM (N=8), EC users (N=10) and NS (N=10) saliva and bronchoscopy-collected bronchoalveolar lavage samples were collected. Bacteria species were identified through metatranscriptome profiling by RNA-sequencing to study associations with the lung and oral microbiome. Pairwise comparisons and linear modeling was assessed with false discovery rates <0.1. Results: Total bacterial load was similar for the SM, EC users and NS, and there was no differences in the bacterial diversity across groups. In the lung, there were 44 bacterial species that were statistically significantly different for SM/NS, 80% of which were decreased in the SM. There were 12 bacterial species that were different for SM/EC users, all of which were decreased, 10 of which were also identified in the SM/NS comparison. The 2 bacterial species unique to SM/EC comparison were Neisseria sp. KEM232 and Curvibacter sp. AEP1-3. From the top 5 decreased species in SM/EC, 3 were also identified in the SM/NS comparison (Neisseria elongata, Neisseria sicca, and Haemophilus parainfluenzae) and 2 of these were unique to the SM/EC comparison (Neisseria zoodegmatis and Ottowia sp. oral taxon 894). There were 8 species increased in SM compared to NS, none of which are known to be clinically significant. In the oral microbiome, 152 bacteria species were differentially abundant for the SM/NS analysis, and only 17 for the EC/NS comparison, all which were also present in SM/NS comparisons. There were 21 bacteria that were differentially abundant in both the lung and oral cavity for SM and NS, 95% also were decreased in the SM. Conclusion: Smoking and EC use do not appear to materially affect the lung microbiome, although differences are noted of unclear clinical significance. Most differentially abundant bacteria decreased, which may be due to a toxic effect of cigarette smoke, including a change in humidity or heating. Given the low number of overlapping oral and lung microbes, the oral microbiome does not appear to be a good surrogate for smoking-related effects in the lung.