[cellml-discussion] in case you haven't seen it | "Why Are Computational Neuroscience and Systems Biology So Separate?"

[James Lawson]

Hi folks,

Pretty interesting read. I actually came to what I do now through a 
heavy cellular neurosci background so this disconnect between systems 
biology and neurosci is something that has really bugged me. They 
mention in the paper that SBML doesn't provide the spatial support 
needed for it to be useful to computational neuroscientists. CellML with 
its emphasis on multiscalar integration and modularity along with 
FieldML to describe the geometric information could address these issues.

Also, I'm always interested in how CellML is represented in these kinds 
of publications. It is usually seen (as in this paper,) by systems 
biologists as a competing language for describing systems biology, which 
is understandable but only partly true. I think we need to seriously 
market CellML as a Physiome language, a lot more than we do. This will 
be a topic in the upcoming paper about the CellML repository I'm 
starting to put together - that is: the name of the software is Physiome 
Model Repository 2 - what has it got to do with the Physiome Project then?


Kind regards,
James

David Nickerson wrote:
> Why Are Computational Neuroscience and Systems Biology So Separate?
> http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.1000078 
>
>
> some interesting comments, although not totally accurate...

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: j_lawson.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 278 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.cellml.org/pipermail/cellml-discussion/attachments/20080603/b804e871/attachment.vcf