Change in CaSpF in phosphomutant myocyte compared to WT: Model prediction versus experimental observation
| . | Control . | Phosphorylated . | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Observed | Model | Observed | |
| S2030A (Potenza et al., 2019) | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ |
| S2808A (Potenza et al., 2020) | ↔ | ↔ | ↑ | ↑ |
| S2814D (van Oort et al., 2010; Uchinoumi et al., 2016) | ↑ | ↑ | ↔ | ↔ |
| S2814A (Baier et al., 2021) | ↑ | ↔ | ↑ | ↔ |
| . | Control . | Phosphorylated . | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Observed | Model | Observed | |
| S2030A (Potenza et al., 2019) | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ |
| S2808A (Potenza et al., 2020) | ↔ | ↔ | ↑ | ↑ |
| S2814D (van Oort et al., 2010; Uchinoumi et al., 2016) | ↑ | ↑ | ↔ | ↔ |
| S2814A (Baier et al., 2021) | ↑ | ↔ | ↑ | ↔ |
The relative change in Ca2+ spark frequency of the indicated phosphomutant myocyte relative to its WT is indicated by an arrow. The columns compare the change predicted by the model to the observed result for myocytes at rest (Control) and after phosphorylation by treatment with either Iso (S2030A, S2808A, and S2814A) or CaMKII (2814D).