Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

Hi James,

Re your final question - the Physiome Project at the moment is largely about
(i) the development of
the markup languages CellML and FieldML (& maybe ModelML for the physics) and
their associated model
repositories and software tools, and (ii) strategies for bridging spatial and
temporal scales. I see
no reason at all not to include neuroscience in this picture - in fact there
are a number of
initiatives relating to a 'brain physiome' just getting underway. The essence
of the Physiome is the
recognition of the need to link models of structure and function across
spatial scales from nm to m
and temporal scales from brownian motion to human lifetime turnover of
proteins. Easy to say ...

While CellML and SBML are in some way competing standards, both communities
are helping one another
greatly by promoting the idea of modelling standards .. and provided we can
convert between them,
there's no particular disadvantage in having two standards.

Cheers,
Peter

James Lawson wrote:
> 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...
>
> _______________________________________________
> cellml-discussion mailing list
> cellml-discussion at cellml.org
> http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: p_hunter.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 376 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.cellml.org/pipermail/cellml-discussion/attachments/20080603/bfd399a8/attachment.vcf

---

• [cellml-discussion] in case you haven't seen it | "Why Are Computational Neuroscience and Systems Biology So Separate?", James Lawson, 06/03/2008
  • [cellml-discussion] in case you haven't seen it | "Why Are Computational Neuroscience and Systems Biology So Separate?", Peter Hunter, 06/03/2008
    • [cellml-discussion] in case you haven't seen it | "Why Are Computational Neuroscience and Systems Biology So Separate?", James Lawson, 06/03/2008
      • [cellml-discussion] in case you haven't seen it | "Why Are Computational Neuroscience and Systems Biology So Separate?", Edmund J. Crampin, 06/03/2008

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.