4.5 Article

Parameter estimation in a stochastic model of the tubuloglomerular feedback mechanism in a rat nephron

Journal

MATHEMATICAL BIOSCIENCES
Volume 194, Issue 1, Pages 49-69

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.mbs.2004.12.007

Keywords

myogenic response; parameter estimation; rat kidney; spectral density; stochastic differential equations; tubuloglomerular feedback mechanism

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A key parameter in the understanding of renal hemodynamics is the gain of the feedback function in the tubuloglomerular feedback mechanism. A dynamic model of autoregulation of renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate has been extended to include a stochastic differential equations model of one of the main parameters that determines feedback gain. The model reproduces fluctuations and irregularities in the tubular pressure oscillations that the former deterministic models failed to describe. This approach assumes that the gain exhibits spontaneous erratic variations that can be explained by a variety of influences, which change over time (blood pressure, hormone levels, etc.). To estimate the key parameters of the model we have developed a new estimation method based on the oscillatory behavior of the data. The dynamics is characterized by the spectral density, which has been estimated for the observed time series, and numerically approximated for the model. The parameters have then been estimated by the least squares distance between data and model spectral densities. To evaluate the estimation procedure measurements of the proximal tubular pressure from 35 nephrons in 16 rat kidneys have been analyzed, and the parameters characterizing the gain and the delay have been estimated. There was good agreement between the estimated values, and the values obtained for the same parameters in independent, previously published experiments. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available