<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Physio.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Physiology</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Physio.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">1664-042X</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Research Foundation</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fphys.2011.00050</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Physiology</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Original Research</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Physiological Environment Induces Quick Response &#x02013; Slow Exhaustion Reactions</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Hiroi</surname> <given-names>Noriko</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Lu</surname> <given-names>James</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Iba</surname> <given-names>Keisuke</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Tabira</surname> <given-names>Akito</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Yamashita</surname> <given-names>Shuji</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Okada</surname> <given-names>Yasunori</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Flamm</surname> <given-names>Christoph</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Oka</surname> <given-names>Kotaro</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>K&#x000F6;hler</surname> <given-names>Gottfried</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff5"><sup>5</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name><surname>Funahashi</surname> <given-names>Akira</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="author-notes" rid="fn001">&#x0002A;</xref>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1"><sup>1</sup><institution>Department of Biosciences and Informatics, Keio University</institution> <country>Yokohama, Japan</country></aff>
<aff id="aff2"><sup>2</sup><institution>Biomolecular Signaling and Control Group, Automatic Control Laboratory, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology</institution> <country>Zurich, Switzerland</country></aff>
<aff id="aff3"><sup>3</sup><institution>Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Keio University</institution> <country>Tokyo, Japan</country></aff>
<aff id="aff4"><sup>4</sup><institution>Institute of Theoretical Chemistry and Structural Biology, University of Vienna</institution> <country>Vienna, Austria</country></aff>
<aff id="aff5"><sup>5</sup><institution>Max F. Perutz Laboratories, University of Vienna</institution> <country>Vienna, Austria</country></aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p>Edited by: Taishin Nomura, Osaka University, Japan</p></fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p>Reviewed by: Andrew McCulloch, University of California San Diego, USA; Richard R. Adams, University of Edinburgh, UK</p></fn>
<fn fn-type="corresp" id="fn001"><p>&#x0002A;Correspondence: Akira Funahashi, Department of Biosciences and Informatics, Keio University, 3-14-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama, Japan. e-mail: <email>funa&#x00040;bio.keio.ac.jp</email></p></fn>
<fn fn-type="other" id="fn002"><p>This article was submitted to Frontiers in Systems Physiology, a specialty of Frontiers in Physiology.</p></fn>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>21</day>
<month>09</month>
<year>2011</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2011</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>2</volume>
<elocation-id>50</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>13</day>
<month>05</month>
<year>2011</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>04</day>
<month>08</month>
<year>2011</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#x000A9; 2011 Hiroi, Lu, Iba, Tabira, Yamashita, Okada, Flamm, Oka, K&#x000F6;hler and Funahashi.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2011</copyright-year>
<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="http://www.frontiersin.org/licenseagreement"><p>This is an open-access article subject to a non-exclusive license between the authors and Frontiers Media SA, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and other Frontiers conditions are complied with.</p></license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<p><italic>In vivo</italic> environments are highly crowded and inhomogeneous, which may affect reaction processes in cells. In this study we examined the effects of intracellular crowding and an inhomogeneity on the behavior of <italic>in vivo</italic> reactions by calculating the spectral dimension (<italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>), which can be translated into the reaction rate function. We compared estimates of anomaly parameters obtained from fluorescence correlation spectroscopy (FCS) data with fractal dimensions derived from transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image analysis. FCS analysis indicated that the anomalous property was linked to physiological structure. Subsequent TEM analysis provided an <italic>in vivo</italic> illustration; soluble molecules likely percolate between intracellular clusters, which are constructed in a self-organizing manner. We estimated a cytoplasmic spectral dimension <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> to be 1.39&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.084. This result suggests that <italic>in vivo</italic> reactions initially run faster than the same reactions in a homogeneous space; this conclusion is consistent with the anomalous character indicated by FCS analysis. We further showed that these results were compatible with our Monte-Carlo simulation in which the anomalous behavior of mobile molecules correlates with the intracellular environment, leading to description as a percolation cluster, as demonstrated using TEM analysis. We confirmed by the simulation that the above-mentioned <italic>in vivo</italic> like properties are different from those of homogeneously concentrated environments. Additionally, simulation results indicated that crowding level of an environment might affect diffusion rate of reactant. Such knowledge of the spatial information enables us to construct realistic models for <italic>in vivo</italic> diffusion and reaction systems.
</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>intracellular crowding</kwd>
<kwd>anomalous diffusion</kwd>
<kwd>fractal dimension</kwd>
<kwd>spectral dimension</kwd>
<kwd>diffusion-limited aggregation</kwd>
<kwd>invasive percolation</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<counts>
<fig-count count="9"/>
<table-count count="6"/>
<equation-count count="24"/>
<ref-count count="34"/>
<page-count count="16"/>
<word-count count="10738"/>
</counts>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec sec-type="introduction">
<label>1</label> <title>Introduction</title>
<p>The complex physical structure of cytoplasm has been a long-standing topic of interest (Fulton, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">1982</xref>). The physiological environment of intracellular biochemical reactants is not one of well-diluted, homogeneous space. This fact contradicts the basic assumption underlying the standard theories for reaction kinetics. The difference may make actual reaction processes deviate from those expected by the theories. If we reconcile the fundamental principle with experimental observations, reaction processes are mainly controlled by the movement of reactants. Consequently, when the environment affects molecular movement, the results would be reflected on the reaction process.</p>
<p>The most basic components that describe reaction kinetics are the concentrations of reactants and kinetic rate constants, which determine the probability of collision between reactants and of state transition of each reactant (Atkins and de Paula, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">2006</xref>; Jackson, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">2006</xref>).</p>
<p>Physiological events consist of quick responses in a molecular reaction level to environmental changes; i.e., a cell needs to store a portion of reaction species in a reaction environment to respond new sequential signals after current signals. This means a cell needs to quickly respond and to prevent exhaustion of reaction sources at the same time. Classical kinetic models which consist of the molecular concentration and constants fit well to <italic>in vitro</italic> reaction processes. However, it is too slow at the beginning of a reaction, or if we force to react quickly, the reaction system exhausts the entire reaction source in an early timing of a reaction process. Also, if we choose specific models such as Hill equation, Michaelis&#x02013;Menten kinetics, etc., we can fit the equations to the shape of the curve of <italic>in vivo</italic> reaction data; however, the case we can find a satisfactory reason to adopt those equations is still rare even after a century of their development. Our results of this study provide a way to fit the model to <italic>in vivo</italic> experimental results, also the natural reason to use the model.</p>
<p>The inhomogeneous, crowded feature of the reaction space is the point we should concern to represent <italic>in vivo</italic> reaction processes precisely. Fractal kinetics has been studied as a candidate to represent <italic>in vivo</italic> reactions (Berry, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">2002</xref>; Schnell and Turner, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">2004</xref>). Kopelman et al. originally built their theory with reactions occurring on fractal structures, later confirmed the reality using a chemical species (naphthalene) on a considerable fractal structure (a filter membrane; Kopelman, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">1988</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">1991</xref>; Parus and Kopelman, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">1989</xref>). The basic description of fractal kinetics is <italic>v</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;<italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>)[<italic>A</italic>] instead of <italic>v</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;<italic>k</italic>[<italic>A</italic>], where <italic>v</italic> is the reaction rate, <italic>k</italic> and <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) are the kinetic constant or function, and [<italic>A</italic>] is the concentration of a reactant; i.e., the reaction rate depends on <italic>t</italic> when it occurs on a fractal structure.</p>
<p>A space including fractal structure can be described quantitatively with a parameter named fractal dimension (<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>). The dynamics of particles in the fractal space is expressed by another parameter, which is spectral dimension <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> (Alexander and Orbach, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1982</xref>). The spectral dimension <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> is a quantity that can be translated into the kinetic function [<italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>)]. Kopelman et al. succeeded to transform <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> into a kinetic function as the exponent in the transformation of the time variable <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02192;</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle scriptlevel='+1'><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Kopelman, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">1988</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">1991</xref>; Parus and Kopelman, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">1989</xref>). Here <italic>d<sub>r</sub></italic> is the fractal dimension, which has the value 2 in the case of Brownian particle motion in Euclidean space (Einstein, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">1905</xref>). This means that if a reaction space has fractal structure, we can describe the dynamics of molecules by experimentally derived <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> and can reflect the spatial characteristics into the description. Deriving <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> let us investigate further effect of the intracellular environment on the form of the reaction.</p>
<p>As we mentioned above, the characteristics of reaction space can be quantified with <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>, and the dynamics of a particle or a molecule can be quantified with <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>. Now there remained a question if intracellular environment consists of fractal structures. Aon et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">2004</xref>) performed experiments to analyze the fractality of mitochondria, and cytoskeletal protein-networks. They derived <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of those organelle but did not use the value directly to calculate <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>.</p>
<p>In our study, we derived the value of <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> directly from our experimental results. We used the relationship between anomaly parameter of diffusion (&#x03B1;) and the above 2D;</p>
<disp-formula id="E1"><label>(1)</label><mml:math id="M2"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>It was originally defined by Alexander and Orbach (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1982</xref>) and Berry (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">2002</xref>). By referring this relationship, we could calculate <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> by the values of &#x003B1; and <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>, which were experimentally obtained by fluorescence correlation spectroscopy (FCS) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM), respectively. Afterward we estimated the reaction kinetics <italic>in vivo</italic> using the transformed equation from the <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>.</p>
<p>Diffusion coefficient is the parameter to express molecular diffusion. The diffusion represented by &#x003B1; is a specific case which occurs in inhomogeneous space, named anomalous diffusion (Gefen et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">1983</xref>). Anomalous diffusion is described with the mean-square displacement (MSD) as follows;</p>
<disp-formula id="E2"><label>(2)</label><mml:math id="M3"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02329;</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x0232A;</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x0221D;</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>The case with &#x003B1;&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1 is for the normal diffusion. The case with &#x003B1;&#x02009;&#x0003C;&#x02009;1 is for anomalous diffusion.</p>
<p>Alexander and Orbach used <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4"><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>&#x003B4;</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='true'>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to express the index governing diffusion. The definition of anomalous diffusion in their description by using MSD is</p>
<disp-formula id="E3"><label>(3)</label><mml:math id="M5"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02329;</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x0232A;</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x0221D;</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>&#x003B4;</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>By comparing Eqs. 2 and 3,</p>
<disp-formula id="E4"><mml:math id="M6"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>&#x003B4;</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>The definition of spectral dimension, in their terminology it is called fracton dimension <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7"><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is</p>
<disp-formula id="E5"><label>(4)</label><mml:math id="M8"><mml:mtable><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>&#x022C5;</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>&#x003B4;</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>&#x022C5;</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9"><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> is fractal dimension (<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>).</p>
<p>Anomalous diffusion was also defined by using a random walker on percolation clusters (Gefen et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">1983</xref>). Percolation theory deals with the number and properties of clusters which are formed as follows (Broadbent and Hammersley, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">1957</xref>); each site of a very large lattice is occupied randomly with probability <italic>p</italic>, independent of its neighbors. In other words the group of neighboring occupied sites is the target of percolation theory (Stauffer and Aharony, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">1994</xref>). When the probability <italic>p</italic> is over the critical value (<italic>p<sub>c</sub></italic>), the cluster reaches from a side to the opposite side. This <italic>p<sub>c</sub></italic> is the threshold to undergo phase transition, such as gelation of polymer sol, and so on. Anomalous diffusion in an inhomogeneous environment is observed when the reaction space is occupied inhomogeneously with obstacles until the relative volume of obstacles reaches close to the threshold. We can obtain each threshold value depending on the shape of the lattice by numerical simulation (Stauffer and Aharony, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">1994</xref>). The value of <italic>p<sub>c</sub></italic> for the 3D cube is 0.312. In some of numerical simulation including our model, percolation lattice is used as a simple example of disordered medium. The mass of a cluster <italic>M</italic> and the linear size of the cluster <italic>L</italic> keep the relation</p>
<disp-formula id="E6"><mml:math id="M10"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0221D;</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>When <italic>p</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1, the cluster is the same with a regular lattice without disorder. In this case, the time dependency of MSD of the random walker is linear. On the other hand, if the random walker is confined at a specific place, then MSD is settled on a constant. The case between these two extreme cases was named anomalous diffusion by Gefen et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">1983</xref>). The exponent representing the time dependency of MSD equals the anomaly parameter &#x003B1;.</p>
<p>Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy is a technique used to detect single fluorescent signals from molecules in a focal volume. The detected fluctuation can be translated into the diffusion time of the molecules via inverse Fourier transformation (Kohler et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">2000</xref>). We used FCS to estimate &#x003B1; (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="E2">2</xref>) by analyzing the measured diffusion time for different pinhole diameters (Rigler et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">1993</xref>).</p>
<p>We controlled intracellular environment with drugs which cause cytoskeletal disorder (for actin disruption: cytochalasin B, for microtubule disruption: colchicine). The aim to treat cells with these drugs is to build a reaction environment, which includes physiological components (such as cytoskeletal proteins, etc.) with original concentration, but the structures of polymers (e.g., actin filaments, microtubule) are not physiological. By using these cells, we could exclude the effect of the molecular concentration, also could avoid using artificial components to build a test environment. As the result, our experiments could investigate purely the meaning of the physiological structures of those filaments.</p>
<p>Transmission electron microscopy image analysis provides a direct check of structural self-similarity. Self-organizing molecules, such as titanium dioxide, and sol&#x02013;gel powders, etc., are readily seen under TEM. We applied this method to determine the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of the intracellular environment using the procedure described by Dobrescu et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">2004</xref>).</p>
<p>Generally, an image obtained by electron microscopy indicates the distribution of electron density of the section. If the electron density is high, the segment in an image appears dark. This means that the density of the electrons captured by cellular components is relatively low at faint-shadowed segment compared with the dark-shadowed segment. Also, there exist many images which investigated intracellular structures by electron microscopy. In those images, organelle, such as nucleus, mitochondria, rough endoplasmic reticulum, zymogen granules, Golgi complex, etc., appear as clear shadows. Based on these facts, we estimated that cytoplasmic diffusion occurs between those components, where thus the faint-shadowed segment.</p>
<p>We produced two different <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s for two different intracellular areas: one was for the immobile structures (S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>), and the other for the mobile area of a solute in a cell (M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>). Based on the above reasons, we assumed that the black segment in the TEM images consisted of solid structures comprising the non-reactive obstacle. Simultaneously, the non-reactive surface can provide anchorage for small mobile molecules. The faint segment areas in TEM images presumed to be made up of sol proteins, which formed the main reaction chamber for the intracellular reactants.</p>
<p>The objective of analyzing the parameters, two <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s with &#x003B1; and <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>, was to estimate how the intracellular reaction space affected the reaction process using M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and &#x003B1; to calculate <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>, and to estimate environmental organization by comparing S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> obtained from TEM with those from the following four numerical models in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>, leading to estimation of the underlying mechanism for building the intracellular environment.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T1">
<label>Table 1</label>
<caption><p><bold>Numerical values of <italic>d</italic><sub>f</sub> from different computational models</bold>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left">Models</th>
<th align="left"><italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic></th>
<th align="left">Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left">DLA (model)</td>
<td align="left">1.71</td>
<td align="left">Tolman and Meakin (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">1989</xref>)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">IP (model)</td>
<td align="left">1.89</td>
<td align="left">Wilkinson and Willemsem (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">1983</xref>)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">dlCCA (model)</td>
<td align="left">1.43</td>
<td align="left">Meakin and Stanley (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">1983</xref>)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">rlCCA (model)</td>
<td align="left">1.55</td>
<td align="left">Meakin and Djordjevi (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">1985</xref>)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>There exist some models in which growing random patterns can evolve into fractal structures. Of particular interest to us are the invasion percolation (IP; Wilkinson and Willemsem, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">1983</xref>), diffusion-limited aggregation (DLA; Tolman and Meakin, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">1989</xref>), diffusion-limited cluster&#x02013;cluster aggregation (dlCCA; Meakin and Stanley, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">1983</xref>), and reaction-limited CCA (rlCCA) model (Meakin and Djordjevi, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">1985</xref>), all of which were used to compare our estimated values of <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> with experimental results.</p>
<p>Finally we constructed a numerical model that enables us to verify the consistency of the hypothesis that the intracellular component is built using a kind of self-organization and that the structure provides a percolation cluster-like environment for soluble molecules. We computed &#x003B1;, derived a reaction rate function <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>), and compared experimental results with simulation. Additionally, we computed the MSD of a diffusing molecule to ascertain the effect of the non-reactive obstacles (NRO) in the reaction space.</p>
<p>Our results allow confirmation of the importance of the physiological intracellular structure, and provide new insights into causes of the argued point that a reaction or molecular movement exhibits a quick initial response, and later slows down to avoid exhaustion of the molecular source in physiological environments.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="materials|methods" id="s1">
<label>2</label> <title>Materials and Methods</title>
<sec>
<label>2.1</label> <title>Cell culture</title>
<p>Cell culture reagents for L-929 were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich Corp. (Austria) and EuroClone Group (Austria). Cytochalasin B (CytB) was sourced from Sigma-Aldrich (Austria). Cell culture reagents for 3Y1 cells were obtained from Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd. (Japan). Both cell lines were routinely cultured in Dulbecco&#x00027;s minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) in a 5% CO<sub>2</sub> incubator. We obtained both L-929 and 3Y1 cell lines from Japanese Collection of Research Bioresources (JCRB) Cell Bank for use at Keio University.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2">
<label>2.2</label> <title>Preparation for FCS</title>
<p>Cells (3&#x02009;&#x000D7;&#x02009;10<sup>4</sup>&#x02009;cells/ml) were seeded in eight-well cover glass-bottom LabTek chambered slides (NUNC) and were grown overnight at 37&#x000B0;C. Cells were washed twice with phosphate buffer saline (PBS) at 37&#x000B0;C. For transfection prior to imaging the cells were incubated with a plasmid DNA encoding green fluorescent protein (pEGFP)-LipofectAMINE (Invitrogen) mixture for transfection.</p>
<p>The transfection reagent, LipofectAMINE LTX, was used according to the manufacturer&#x00027;s instructions. Briefly, we resuspended 3&#x02009;&#x003BC;g/ml plasmid DNA in 88&#x02009;&#x003BC;l of serum-free DMEM, and then mixed in 12&#x02009;&#x003BC;l of LipofectAMINE LTX reagent. After incubation of the mixture of DNA and reagent at room temperature for 30&#x02009;min, the cells were treated with the after incubated mixture of DNA and reagent. After 48&#x02009;h of incubation with the DNA, we checked the expression levels of the green fluorescent protein (GFP) fluorescence microscopy.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3">
<label>2.3</label> <title>FCS analysis</title>
<p>We performed FCS on GFP-transfected mouse fibroblast, L-929 cells. The FCS measurements were conducted using a confocal spectrofluorimeter (Carl Zeiss-Evotec, Jena, Germany) equipped with an argon (Ar)-laser, a water immersion objective (C-Apochromat 63&#x02009;W&#x02009;&#x000D7;&#x02009;1.2&#x02009;W Korr), an avalanche photodiode (SPCM-CD 3017), and a hardware autocorrelator (ALV 5000, ALV; Langen, Germany). Samples were excited using a 488-nm Ar-laser-line attenuated by optical density filters, and the fluorescence signal was detected through a dichroic mirror with band-pass filters [the excitation filter wavelengths: 477&#x02013;494&#x02009;nm (486 central wave length), dichromatic beam splitter wavelength: 508&#x02009;nm, emission filter wavelength: 517&#x02013;567&#x02009;nm (542 central wave length)]. The set pinhole diameter ranged from 25 to 75&#x02009;&#x003BC;m.</p>
<p>The detected fluctuations were translated into the diffusion time of the molecules via inverse Fourier transformation (Kohler et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">2000</xref>). We estimated &#x003B1; (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="E2">2</xref>) by analyzing the measured diffusion time for different pinhole diameters, followed the method of Masuda et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">2005</xref>) and Rigler et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">1993</xref>).</p>
<p>From the expression for free diffusion of Gaussian intensity distribution (<italic>G</italic>) described in Masuda et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">2005</xref>).</p>
<disp-formula id="E7"><label>(5)</label><mml:math id="M11"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>&#x003C4;</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>&#x003C4;</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>&#x003C4;</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>&#x003C4;</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Regarding the second term of Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="E5">5</xref>, we have</p>
<disp-formula id="E8"><mml:math id="M12"><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>&#x003C4;</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>q</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>&#x003C4;</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x003C4;</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mn>4</mml:mn><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>where <italic>z</italic> is the axial radius, and <italic>q</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;<italic>z</italic>/<italic>w</italic> is the structural parameter. Hence, <italic>G</italic> varies linearly with &#x003C4; if the second term dominates over the first term.</p>
<p>We tested our model with free diffusion of Rhodamine 6G (R6G). The confocal volume at 45&#x02009;&#x003BC;m calibrated with R6G was 0.17&#x02009;&#x003BC;m in the radial and 2.4&#x02009;&#x003BC;m in the axial dimension. We also tested the assumption that the diffusion time &#x003C4;<italic><sub>D</sub></italic>(&#x0003D;<italic>w</italic><sup>2</sup>/4<italic>D</italic>) of R6G scales linearly with the pinhole diameter (Hiroi et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">2011</xref>).</p>
<p>For the analysis with colchicine treated cells, we performed FCS with LSM780 and analyzed the data with ZEN 2009 (Carl Zeiss MicroImaging GmbH, Jena, Germany). Calibration methods and the settings of laser, pinhole sizes are the same except the pinhole size for calibration and one of them for anomaly test was changed from 45 or 35 to 34&#x02009;&#x003BC;m based on the manufacture&#x00027;s recommended procedures.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>2.4</label> <title>Cytochalasin B treatment</title>
<p>To test the effect of physiological organization of cytoskeletal proteins, a fraction of L-929 cells was treated with final concentration 2&#x02009;&#x003BC;M CytB/DMSO for 1&#x02009;h at 37&#x000B0;C in 5% CO<sub>2</sub> atmosphere prior to FCS analysis. As a negative control 1/100 volume of DMSO/culture medium was prepared. The following steps are identical for both treated and non-treated cells. Under this condition of CytB treatment, we noted that cells adhered to the bottom of the culture chamber.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>2.5</label> <title>Colchicine treatment</title>
<p>We also performed FCS with colchicine, which is a microtubule inhibitor, treated cells in order to test the effect of physiological organization of cytoskeletal proteins. The other portion of L-929 cells was treated with final concentration 2&#x02009;&#x003BC;M colchicine/EtOH for 1&#x02009;h at 37&#x000B0;C in 5% CO<sub>2</sub> atmosphere before FCS analysis. Negative control was performed with 1/100 volume of EtOH/culture medium. The following steps were the same as those used with non-treated cells.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>2.6</label> <title>Transmission electron microscopy</title>
<p>We obtained 165 images of rat fibroblast 3Y1 cells and analyzed them by box counting methods.</p>
<p>The source images were the subregion of the images of cytoplasmic region. The cells were collected on the day when the cells reached at the confluent condition in order to obtain the homogeneous population in their cell cycle (G1 to G0 cells).</p>
<p>In preparation for TEM, the cells were fixed with 4% formaldehyde and 2% glutaraldehyde in 0.1&#x02009;M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4) for 16&#x02009;h at 4&#x000B0;C, and successively with 1% osmium tetraoxide in 0.1&#x02009;M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4). The cells were dehydrated in graded ethanol and embedded in epoxy resin. Ultrathin sections (approximately 60&#x02009;nm thick) were prepared with a diamond knife and were electron-stained with uranyl acetate and lead citrate, and were examined using an electron microscope (H-7650; Hitachi Ltd.).</p>
<p>The parameter <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> was derived from box counting as explained below (Chhabra et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">1989</xref>).</p>
<p>First, the TEM images were binarized into objects and background using the Auto-thresholding function of ImageJ (<uri xlink:href="http://rsbweb.nih.gov/ij/">http://rsbweb.nih.gov/ij/</uri>). Briefly, this algorithm computes the average intensity of the pixels at below or above, a particular threshold. It then computes the average of these two values, increments the threshold, and iterates the process until the threshold is larger than the composite average. That is,</p>
<disp-formula id="E9"><mml:math id="M13"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>threshold</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mtext>average&#x0200A;&#x02009;background</mml:mtext><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mtext>average &#x02009;&#x0200A;objects</mml:mtext><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>A scaling rule for the relation between the count and box size in box counting, assuming that these correspond respectively to details or the number of parts (<italic>N</italic>) and scale (&#x003B5;) is given by:</p>
<disp-formula id="E10"><mml:math id="M14"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mtable><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>lim</mml:mtext></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02192;</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x0221E;</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>&#x003B5;</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mi>&#x003B5;</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>where the limit is found as the slope of the regression line.</p>
<p>We additionally calculated the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s of the original images plus Gaussian noise (SD&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;0.01 or 0.02), and impulse (salt and pepper) noise (density&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;0.05 or 0.1) by using MATLAB. Also, we tested the effect of changing the threshold by taking different ratios between the background and objects. In the original test, the background to object ratio was 0.5. We altered this ratio to 0.4 or 0.6.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>2.7</label> <title>Statistical tests for <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> values</title>
<p>We calculated the statistics <italic>D</italic> of Kolmogorov&#x02013;Smirnov test, <italic>F</italic> value of Fisher&#x02013;Snedecor <italic>F</italic>-test, and <italic>T</italic> value of Welch&#x00027;s test by freely distributed software R (R Development Core Team, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">2011</xref>).</p>
<sec>
<label>2.7.1</label> <title>Kolmogorov&#x02013;smirnov test for testing normality of the distribution of data population</title>
<p>We confirmed that the two data populations, M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> were normally distributed by Kolmogorov&#x02013;Smirnov test.</p>
<p>Null hypothesis <italic>H</italic><sub>0</sub> is that the M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> follow a normal distribution. The alternative hypothesis <italic>H<sub>a</sub></italic> is the data do not follow a normal distribution.</p>
<p>The test statistics <italic>D</italic> is defined as</p>
<disp-formula id="E11"><mml:math id="M15"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>max</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>&#x02264;</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02264;</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>where <italic>F</italic> in this test is the theoretical cumulative distribution of the distribution being tested. The <italic>H</italic><sub>0</sub> is rejected if the test statistics <italic>D</italic> is greater than the critical value. In our case, the each sample size was 165. Based on the Lilliefors&#x02019; 1967 work, the critical value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle scriptlevel='+1'><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle scriptlevel='+1'><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.886</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mn>165</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0690</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The calculated <italic>D</italic> values for M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>M</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.104</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>&#x02009;&#x0200A;</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>S</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.0738</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were respectively. We therefore inferred that <italic>H</italic><sub>0</sub> was not valid, i.e., these data sets were not distributed normally. We also confirmed the normality of the data distribution by Jarque&#x02013;Bera test. The result meant that these data sets are not distributed normally as same as the result by Kolmogorov&#x02013;Smirnov test.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>2.7.2</label> <title>Mann&#x02013;whitney test</title>
<p>The distributions of both populations departed from normality. Therefore, we performed Mann&#x02013;Whitney (MW) test to test the following null hypothesis. The null hypothesis <italic>H</italic><sub>0</sub> is that two independent samples are drawn from the same population, it means that two samples come from identical population. The alternative hypothesis, <italic>H<sub>a</sub></italic> is that two independent samples come from different populations.</p>
<p>We computed a statistics <italic>U</italic> by pooling observations from both samples and sorting them by value. For one of the samples, for each observation, the number of larger-value observations in the alternative sample was counted, and the results summed. This procedure can be repeated for the other sample. When the two values are equal, the half point is added to the statistics. At the same time we calculated the mean of <italic>U</italic></p>
<disp-formula id="E12"><mml:math id="M18"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>&#x003BC;</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>together with its SD</p>
<disp-formula id="E13"><mml:math id="M19"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>&#x003C3;</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>We calculated the statistics <italic>z</italic> as</p>
<disp-formula id="E14"><label>(6)</label><mml:math id="M20"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>&#x003BC;</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>&#x003C3;</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>We used the result of Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="E6">6</xref> to derive probability <italic>P</italic>.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>2.7.3</label> <title>Confidence limits for the mean</title>
<p>The confidential intervals were estimated so that the mean of our experimental <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> values could be compared with that derived from numerically computed <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s (Wilkinson and Willemsem, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">1983</xref>; Meakin and Djordjevi, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">1985</xref>; Tolman and Meakin, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">1989</xref>; Dobrescu et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">2004</xref>; Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>). The interval estimation reflects the degree of uncertainty in the derived mean.</p>
<p>Confidence limits are expressed in terms of a confidence coefficient. We applied a 99.0% confidence interval, to be interpreted as follows. We will find a confidence interval between the two stochastic endpoints with probability 0.99, in which we intercept the mean value of the population: the true mean value lies between the endpoints calculated from the sampled mean in 99.0% of cases.</p>
<p>The confidence interval is defined</p>
<disp-formula id="E15"><mml:math id="M21"><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>&#x000B1;</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Therein, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22"><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> signifies the sample mean, <italic>s</italic> represents the sample SD, <italic>N</italic> stands for the sample size, <italic>a</italic> is the desired significance level, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle scriptlevel='+1'><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and denotes the upper critical value of the <italic>t</italic> distribution with <italic>N</italic>&#x02009;&#x02212;&#x02009;1 degrees of freedom (<italic>DF</italic>). The confidence coefficient is 1&#x02009;&#x02212;&#x02009;<italic>a</italic>.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>2.7.4</label> <title>Fisher&#x02013;snedecor F-test</title>
<p><italic>F</italic>-test (Snedecor and Cochran, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">1989</xref>) was performed for testing equality of 2 SD of the two <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> populations. We performed two-tailed test. Briefly, the <italic>F</italic> hypothesis test is defined as follows. The null hypothesis <italic>H</italic><sub>0</sub> is &#x003C3;<sub>1</sub>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;&#x003C3;<sub>2</sub>, and the alternative hypothesis <italic>H<sub>a</sub></italic> is &#x003C3;<sub>1</sub>&#x02009;&#x02260;&#x02009;&#x003C3;<sub>2</sub>.</p>
<p>The test statistics <italic>F</italic> is</p>
<disp-formula id="E16"><label>(7)</label><mml:math id="M24"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="E17"><label>(8)</label><mml:math id="M25"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>where <italic>N</italic><sub>1</sub> and <italic>N</italic><sub>2</sub> are the sample sizes, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the sample means, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the sample variances.</p>
<p><italic>H</italic><sub>0</sub> is rejected when <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x0003E;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x003BD;</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x003BD;</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the critical value of the <italic>t</italic> distribution with <italic>DF</italic> where</p>
<disp-formula id="E18"><label>(9)</label><mml:math id="M32"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>&#x003BD;</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>In our case, both <italic>N</italic><sub>1</sub>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;<italic>N</italic><sub>2</sub>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;165. When the significance level <italic>a</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;0.01, the critical value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle scriptlevel='+1'><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x003BD;</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>2.591.</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></p>
<p>If <italic>T</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003E;&#x02009;2.591, <italic>H</italic><sub>0</sub> is rejected, i.e., the two population are not the same.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>2.8</label> <title>Monte-carlo simulation of the reaction process in inhomogeneous crowded space</title>
<p>We performed a Monte-Carlo simulation to investigate the reaction processes in a pseudo-inhomogeneous 3D space represented by a reaction space randomly interspersed with NRO.</p>
<p>The simulation space is a 50&#x02009;&#x000D7;&#x02009;50&#x02009;&#x000D7;&#x02009;50 cubic lattice with periodic boundary conditions. The reaction simulated in our model is <italic>A</italic>&#x02009;&#x0002B;&#x02009;<italic>A</italic>&#x02009;&#x02192;&#x02009;<italic>A</italic>. The location of each reactant at a given time step is assigned randomly. If the chosen lattice site was previously empty, the reactant fills the site; if the site was occupied by a non-reactive obstacle, a new position is randomly allocated for the reactant; if a reactant <italic>A</italic>1 moves to a site which has been occupied by the other reactant <italic>A</italic>2, <italic>A</italic>1 remains at the lattice site and <italic>A</italic>2 is obliterated. The simulator is implemented in C&#x0002B;&#x0002B; programming language.</p>
<p>We tested another spatial condition by arranging the same volume of NRO as they form one big cube in the reaction space, and analyzed the effect of the shape of NRO.</p>
<p>The number of time steps was 1,000, 10,000, or 40,000. The initial amount of the reactant was 1,000. The spatial conditions defined by the relative volume of NRO were changed at 10% increments from 10 to 70%. Simulations were performed 100,000 times for each condition.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>3</label> <title>Results</title>
<p>In this study, two separate biological experiments were conducted using mammalian cell lines and the results compared with the output of a single numerical model analysis. Experiments yielded values of the anomaly parameter &#x003B1; and fractal dimensions S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>. Numerical simulations yielded an independent estimate of &#x003B1;, and also allowed us to observe the time course of <italic>in silico</italic> reactions. We compared the reaction form predicted by <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>), derived from</p>
<disp-formula id="E19"><label>(10)</label><mml:math id="M34"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mtext>M</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>and produced by the simulation. We also simulated MSD for each different condition of the reaction space.</p>
<sec>
<label>3.1</label> <title>Anomaly parameters analyzed using FCS</title>
<sec>
<label>3.1.1</label> <title>The case of normal cells</title>
<p>Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy analyses were performed to infer the molecular dynamics <italic>in vivo</italic>. Reportedly, spherical proteins diffuse anomalously inside the cell (Weiss et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">2004</xref>; Malchus and Weiss, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">2010</xref>). We determined the anomaly parameters of GFP in the cytoplasmic region.</p>
<p>We used GFP-transfected mouse fibroblast cells, L-929, for the FCS analysis.</p>
<p>The confocal volume at 45&#x02009;&#x003BC;m pinhole diameter calibrated with R6G was 0.17&#x02009;&#x003BC;m in the radial and 2.4&#x02009;&#x003BC;m in the axial dimension. We also confirmed the linearity of the relationship between diffusion time &#x003C4;<italic><sub>D</sub></italic>(&#x0003D;<italic>w</italic><sup>2</sup>/4<italic>D</italic>) of R6G and pinhole diameter (Hiroi et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">2011</xref>). Based on these calibration results, we evaluated the microscope system as suitable for further experiments.</p>
<p>The calculated &#x003B1; based on the 160 FCS data of GFP diffusion in cytoplasm was 0.768&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.14 (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">1</xref>B). This result is compatible with the previously reported results that GFP shows anomalous diffusion in cytoplasm (Weiss et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">2004</xref>).</p>
<fig id="F1" position="float">
<label>Figure 1</label>
<caption><p><bold>Estimated anomaly parameters based on 160 FCS data</bold>. <bold>(A)</bold> Relationship between diffusion time t and auto-correlation function <italic>C</italic>(&#x003C4;). This sample was obtained using a 45-&#x003BC;m diameter pinhole. Calibration was undertaken with R6G at four settings of the pinhole diameter (25, 35, 45, 75&#x02009;&#x003BC;m; Hiroi et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">2011</xref>). <bold>(B)</bold> The histogram indicates the distribution of the anomaly parameter &#x003B1; obtained from 160 measurements with GFP in the cytoplasmic region.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-g001.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>3.1.2</label> <title>Effect of cytochalasin B treatment</title>
<p>We verified that the anomaly characteristics depend on the physiological intracellular structure by performing the same analysis on CytB-treated cells. CytB is a drug that disorders the actin polymer. Treatment with CytB breaks up the physiological filamentous structure of actin (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2</xref>A) and causes it to randomly aggregate (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2</xref>B). High concentrations of CytB result in rounded cells that lose anchorage completely. Under the conditions of our experiments, cells could retain attachment to the bottom of the culture chamber while the filamentous structure of actin was broken up hence resulting in the observation of the aggregations.</p>
<fig id="F2" position="float">
<label>Figure 2</label>
<caption><p><bold>Representative photographs of the cells; negative control with 1/100 volume of DMSO (A); and treated with 2&#x02009;&#x003BC;M final concentration CytB (B)</bold>. Actin filaments of these cells were stained with Alexa488 conjugated phalloidin. The negative control cells have not changed their shape compared with non-treated cells. Cells treated with CytB showed aggregation of actin molecules while adherence to the bottom of the culture chamber was maintained. The scale bars represent 10&#x02009;&#x003BC;m.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-g002.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Under this condition, we confirmed the spatial distribution of actin aggregation and GFP in cells (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA1">A1</xref> in Appendix). GFP distribution was uniform in control cells (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA1">A1</xref>A in Appendix, upper left panel and lower panel), and the distribution was not changed by CytB treatment (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA1">A1</xref>B in Appendix, upper left panel and lower panel). On the other hand, actin filaments exist in the vicinity of cellular membrane in control cells (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA1">A1</xref>A in Appendix, upper right panel and lower panel). After CytB treatment, actin filaments were broken up and produced aggregation but staying at the vicinity of cellular membrane (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA1">A1</xref>B in Appendix, upper right panel and lower panel). These observations mean that GFP and actin do not interact neither do not move together <italic>in vivo</italic> environment.</p>
<p>Results from these experiments implied that CytB-treated cells did not much change their volume, also the aggregation of actin produced by this reagent did not trap transfected GFP; hence the total protein concentration did not differ from those in normal cells, but cytoskeletal structures were disrupted.</p>
<p>We analyzed the anomaly parameter of five CytB-treated cells (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">2</xref>), obtaining &#x003B1;&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;0.796&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.056. The mean value we obtained from CytB-treated cells is closer to that expected under normal diffusion condition (&#x003B1;&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1). However by considering the range of the SD, the difference between control cells (negative control with DMSO) and CytB-treated cells was unclear. To confirm the possibility of that anomalous character of diffusion constant may depend more on the physiologically organized intracellular structures than on the intracellular protein concentration, we performed FCS analysis with the cells disrupted their cytoskeletons by the other reagent, in this case colchicine, an inhibitor of tubulin polymerization.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T2">
<label>Table 2</label>
<caption><p><bold>Anomaly parameters of control cells and CytB-treated cells</bold>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left">Cell type</th>
<th align="left">&#x003B1;</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left">Control cells (DMSO)</td>
<td align="char" char="&#x000B1;">0.768&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.14</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">CytB-treated cells</td>
<td align="char" char="&#x000B1;">0.796&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.057</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>CytB, cytochalasin B</italic>.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>3.1.3</label> <title>The effect of colchicine treatment</title>
<p>The effect of actin disruption was not clear, so we performed another experiment to confirm the effect of cytoskeletal disruption by using colchicine. Treatment with colchicine inhibits the polymerization of tubulin into microtubule. We performed 270 times FCS analysis with colchicine treated L-929 cells together with 48 times analysis of solvent-treated (EtOH) control cells. Because of the effect of the solvent (EtOH) of colchicine, the anomaly parameter of control cells (mean: 0.585&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.28, mode: 0.68) was smaller than non-treated cells also than DMSO treated cells. However, the basic effect of microtubule disruption was similar with the effect of actin polymer disorders (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA2">A2</xref> in Appendix). The anomaly parameter of colchicine treated cells is approximately 0.02 closer to 1.0 than that of the control cells (mean: 0.602&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.085, mode: 0.71). This is the same tendency with the case of actin disruption (anomaly parameter of CytB-treated cells was approximately 0.03 closer to 1.0 than that of control cells).</p>
<p>The wide range of SD of control cells made the effect of cytoskeletal disruption unclear; as the result we could not say there is a meaningful difference between the anomaly parameter values of control cells and of cytoskeleton disruptor-treated cells by statistical analysis. We may mention here that there is no clear contradiction to say keeping physiological cytoskeletal structure is effective to increase anomaly characteristics of <italic>in vivo</italic> environment.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>3.2</label> <title>Fractal dimensions analyzed using TEM</title>
<p>Next we investigated the dimensionality of intracellular structures. We applied the box counting method to 165 TEM images of rat fibroblast 3Y1 cells, using the algorithm indicated in the Section <xref ref-type="sec" rid="s1">2</xref> (Chhabra et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">1989</xref>) to derive <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>.</p>
<p>We estimated two <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s of two distinct segments in the cell images as explained in the Introduction. The M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> was calculated for the white segments in the binarized TEM images (white segment in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">3</xref>A), while the S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> was calculated for the outline of the solid structures in the TEM images (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">3</xref>B). We tested whether these two <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s are statistically different or the same (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">3</xref>). Applying the MW-test, we infer that the probability of that these two <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s are the same (<italic>P</italic>) is less than 0.01.</p>
<fig id="F3" position="float">
<label>Figure 3</label>
<caption><p><bold>Fractal dimension calculation from the material TEM images of rat fibroblast 3Y1 cells</bold>. <bold>(A)</bold> Image data from which we obtained M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>. The left and right panels display the original TEM and binarized images respectively. The histogram (bottom) displays the relationship between the value of the M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (lateral) and the frequency of occurrence (vertical). <bold>(B)</bold> The data from which we computed S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>. The left panel displays the original image. The image was once processed into a binary image <bold>(A)</bold>; afterward, binary images were used to estimate <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of the mobile area in cytoplasmic material. The histogram shows the relationship between the value of S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (lateral) and frequency of occurrence (vertical). The scale bars represent 1&#x02009;&#x003BC;m.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-g003.tif"/>
</fig>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T3">
<label>Table 3</label>
<caption><p><bold>Statistical analysis of two intracellular <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic></bold>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left"><italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> Variation or statistical test</th>
<th align="left">Results</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left">TEM (experiment) mobile area (M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>)</td>
<td align="left">Median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.81</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">TEM (experiment) immobile structure (S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>)</td>
<td align="left">Median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.75</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">MW-test <italic>P</italic> value between M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic></td>
<td align="left">9.49&#x02009;&#x000D7;&#x02009;10<sup>&#x02212;11</sup>&#x02009;&#x0003C;&#x02009;0.01</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">99.0% confidence interval of M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic></td>
<td align="left">(1.72, 1.89)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">99.0% confidence interval of S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic></td>
<td align="left">(1.64, 1.83)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>The statistical population consists of 165 samples for both the mobile space (Md<sub>f</sub>) and immobile structure (Sd<sub>f</sub>). The results show that these populations are not identical (MW-test result). In 99.0% of tested cases, Md<sub>f</sub> lies between the endpoints (the fourth row). In 99.0% of tested cases, Sd<sub>f</sub> lies between the endpoints (the fifth row)</italic>.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>We proceeded to examine which fractal models can explain the effect of the intracellular environment on free molecules, and therefore which models are candidates for understanding the organizing processes of the intracellular structure.</p>
<p>The median value of the M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> was 1.81, the mean value and the SD of the M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.81&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.083. This result suggests that, in 99.0% of cases, M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> lies between 1.72 and 1.89. This interval includes only the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> value of IP model (<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.89, Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>). The lower endpoint of the confidence interval is larger than all the other <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> values of percolation models, but close to the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> value of DLA (1.71). On the other hand, the median value of the estimated S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> was 1.75, with mean value and its SD of the S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.74&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.096. In 99.0% of cases, S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> will lie between 1.64 and 1.83. This interval includes only the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of DLA model (<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.71, Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>). Even accounting for 99.0% of cases, the lower endpoint of the confidence interval is 1.64, significantly larger than the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of rlCCA model (&#x0003D;1.55). The higher endpoint was 1.83, which is smaller than the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> predicted by the IP model (Tables <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">3</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>3.3</label> <title>The effect of two noises</title>
<p>In order to examine whether those values of fractal dimension are robust against noises, we prepared four different data sets with adding two types of noises. One type of the noises is Gaussian noise. This type of noise is included when the microscope has a problem; for example the problem of magnetic lens, thermal noise originated from surrounding electronic circuit, and so on. This noise is estimated that the occurrence probability can be modeled with Gaussian distribution. We prepared two strength of the noise to our TEM image set, respectively. The other type of noises is impulse (salt and pepper) noise. Generally this type of noise is included during transferring the data, and appears with white and black dots with fixed probability. We also prepared two strength of the noise to our TEM image set, respectively. For TEM analysis, noise can be added during the sample preparation.</p>
<p>The results showed that Gaussian noise does not change the <italic>df</italic> values that much but dilutes the specific characteristics of each image (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T4">4</xref>). On the other hand, impulse noise does not affect M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>, but greatly changes the value of S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>. These results suggest that keeping good maintenance of microscope and checking the condition at each analysis are important, also to avoid the miss preparation of materials is needed to find clear characteristics of each structure in a cell. On the other hand, the basic values of intracellular <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s were kept between the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s of DLA and IP models (1.71 and 1.89).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T4">
<label>Table 4</label>
<caption><p><bold>Noise effect examination at <italic>d</italic><sub>f</sub> calculation by TEM images</bold>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left">Conditions</th>
<th align="left">Results</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left">Gaussian noise (0.01)</td>
<td align="left">M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.836</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left">S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.835</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Gaussian noise (0.02)</td>
<td align="left">M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.835</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left">S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.837</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">MW-test <italic>P</italic> value between M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (g0.01)</td>
<td align="left">0.547&#x02009;&#x0003E;&#x02009;0.01</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">MW-test <italic>P</italic> value between M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (g0.02)</td>
<td align="left">0.548&#x02009;&#x0003E;&#x02009;0.01</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Impulse noise (0.05)</td>
<td align="left">M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.810</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left">S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.795</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Impulse noise (0.1)</td>
<td align="left">M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.823</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left">S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.810</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left"><italic>T</italic> test <italic>P</italic> value between M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (sp0.05)</td>
<td align="left">0.00246&#x02009;&#x0003C;&#x02009;0.01</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left"><italic>T</italic> test <italic>P</italic> value between M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> and S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (sp0.1)</td>
<td align="left">0.0424&#x02009;&#x0003E;&#x02009;0.01</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>The statistical population consists of 165 samples for both the mobile space (Md<sub>f</sub>) and immobile structure (Sd<sub>f</sub>). The results show that only the cases that the impulse noise is added in low frequency among these populations are not identical (T test result)</italic>.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>3.4</label> <title>Estimation of the spectral dimension</title>
<p>Next we estimated <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> from the mean of &#x003B1; and M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> values, which were obtained from Sections <xref ref-type="sec" rid="s2">2.2</xref> and <xref ref-type="sec" rid="s3">2.3</xref> by Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="E10">10</xref>.</p>
<disp-formula id="E20"><mml:math id="M35"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mover accent='true'><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x000AF;</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>&#x000D7;</mml:mo><mml:mtext>M</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.39</mml:mn><mml:mo>&#x000B1;</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.084</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Not only the <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> value derived from M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> but also the <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> value derived from S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (1.34&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.084) were close to the theoretically expected value (1.32; Alexander and Orbach, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1982</xref>), and the values estimated by numerical simulations (1.2&#x02013;1.4; Meakin and Djordjevi, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">1985</xref>). We used the <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> which was derived from M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> instead of S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> for further analyses by following two reasons; first, our original assumption is that the area expressed by M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> is the space for free molecular movement. This reason is important for the objective of analyzing <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>. The second is the robustness of this value against noises. M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> was less affected by the noises, which means the result we obtain here by using this value will be easily reproduced in the other place and opportunity. Because of the above reasons, we used the <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> derived from M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> in further analyses instead of the <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> derived from S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>. The median value of <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> derived with M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> among 165 estimates is 1.39.</p>
<p>From the expression,</p>
<disp-formula id="E21"><mml:math id="M36"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi><mml:mo>&#x022C5;</mml:mo><mml:mtext>M</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.305</mml:mn><mml:mo>&#x000B1;</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.038</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>This result suggests that a reaction at the initial time occurs faster <italic>in vivo</italic> than for the time-independent reaction, which corresponds to reactions in a homogeneous well-diluted environment (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">4</xref>A).</p>
<fig id="F4" position="float">
<label>Figure 4</label>
<caption><p><bold>Estimated characteristics of the value <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> (A) The curve of <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>)&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;<italic>t</italic><sup>&#x02212;0301&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0. 056</sup></bold>. <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) (<italic>y</italic> axis) is plotted as a function of <italic>t</italic> (<italic>x</italic> axis). Results are shown for minimum (blue), average (red), and the maximum (magenta) case of the exponent of <italic>t</italic> among the range. Characteristics of the <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) lines show that any constant <italic>k</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003E;&#x02009;0 is smaller than <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) at first but later exceeds this time-dependent function. The dashed black line (<italic>k</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;2) is an example case. <italic>k</italic> (&#x0003D;2) is smaller than any <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) line at the beginning of the reaction, and afterward it overcomes <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>). This means that the reaction governed by this function starts rapidly in the inhomogeneous environment, but later slow down (relative to the classically assumed homogeneous environment). <bold>(B)</bold> Solution of the differential equation <italic>dx</italic>/<italic>dt</italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;&#x02212;<italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>)<italic>x</italic>. The solution is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle scriptlevel='+1'><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.43</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> The variation of the lines depends on the variation of a constant <italic>c</italic><sub>1</sub> from 0.1 to 0.5, which appears in the right-hand term when we re-express the result as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.43</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-g004.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>We also obtained the solution of the differential equation</p>
<disp-formula id="E22"><label>(11)</label><mml:math id="M39"><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>to estimate the fluctuation of the reactant of a time-dependent reaction described by Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="E11">11</xref>.</p>
<p>The solution of the differential equation is</p>
<disp-formula id="E23"><label>(12)</label><mml:math id="M40"><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1.43</mml:mn><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn>0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>The fluctuation of <italic>x</italic> (the concentration of reactant) in Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="E12">12</xref> is shown graphically in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">4</xref>B.</p>
<p>Experimental results therefore suggest that physiological structural conditions induce quick response in the initial stages of a reaction, but later prevent the exhaustion of the reaction source.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<label>3.5</label> <title>Reaction process simulation in 3D space with hinder molecules and anomalous diffusion exponent estimation</title>
<p>Next we tested whether the estimated reaction process, as inferred from our experiments, is consistent with the simulation results which reconstructed a reaction in an inhomogeneous, crowded environment. We performed Monte-Carlo simulation to investigate the reaction processes in a pseudo-inhomogeneous 3D space represented by adding NRO randomly to the reaction space.</p>
<p>Simulation results showed that <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) behaves almost as a constant when NRO occupy less than 30% [Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5</xref>A, green&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;0%, orange&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;10%, pink&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;20%, brown&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;30%; line color&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;relative NRO volume(%)]. When the NRO occupancy of the simulation space is close to the percolation threshold, the behavior of <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) is similar to the results obtained from experiments [Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">4</xref>A and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5</xref>A, magenta&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;40%, light blue&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;50%, blue&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;55%, red&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;60%, light green&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;65%; line color&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;relative NRO volume(%), and Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA4">A4</xref> in Appendix].</p>
<fig id="F5" position="float">
<label>Figure 5</label>
<caption><p><bold>Simulation Results in 3D space with non-reactive obstacles (NRO)</bold>.<bold>(A)</bold> Fluctuation of <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) with time. When less than 30% of 3D space is occupied by the NRO, <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) behaves similarly to a constant (green line&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;0%, orange&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;10%, magenta&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;20%, brown&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;30%). With NRO occupant close to the percolation threshold, behavior of <italic>k</italic>(<italic>t</italic>) becomes similar to experimentally observed behavior. <bold>(B)</bold> Time course fluctuation of reactant concentration. When the NRO occupancy is close to percolation threshold (blue&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;65%, cyan&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;60%), the fluctuation of the reactants shows a &#x0201C;quick response and slow exhaustion&#x0201D; pattern. This result compares well with that presented in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">4</xref>B. <bold>(C)</bold> The behavior of mean-square displacement (MSD). At 0% NRO occupancy, MSD behaves as a normal diffusion. Between occupancies of 10% (red) and 40% (magenta), MSD exhibits hindered diffusion behavior. At over 40% occupancy and up to the percolation threshold (60%&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;purple), the plot of MSD versus reaction time is concave, consistent with directed diffusion. Beyond the percolation threshold (70%&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;cyan), the curve becomes convex, indicating confined diffusion.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-g005.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>On the other hand, time course fluctuation of the reactant concentration showed that when NRO occupancy approaches the percolation threshold (blue&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;65%, cyan&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;60%), the reactant fluctuations exhibit &#x0201C;quick response and slow exhaustion&#x0201D; pattern (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5</xref>B). This result compares favorably with the result indicated in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">4</xref>B.</p>
<p>Finally, we analyzed the behavior of MSD with respect to the relative amount of NRO in the simulation space (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5</xref>C). At NRO 0%, MSD exhibits normal diffusion pattern. Between NRO occupancies of 10% (red) to 40% (magenta), MSD appears to exhibit hindered diffusion behavior. At NRO occupancies over 40% up to the percolation threshold (60%&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;purple), the plot of MSD versus reaction time develops a concavity, consistent with directed diffusion. When NRO occupancy is over the percolation threshold (70%&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;cyan), the curve becomes convex with lower value of normal diffusion case (the line of 0%), indicating confined diffusion.</p>
<p>Generally, the characteristics of a reaction process change at the percolation threshold (defined as the ratio between the lattice sites occupied by obstacles and free lattice sites; [68.8: 31.2 (%)] in 3D space). For concentrations of initial reactants up to the percolation threshold, reactions are accelerated at the beginning of the reaction, but the final concentrations of the products are lower as the ratio increases (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5</xref>).</p>
<p>The estimated anomalous diffusion exponents that were dependent on the ratio are shown in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T5">5</xref>. Values near the percolation threshold (60%) are close to the value calculated from FCS data (0.768&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.14).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T5">
<label>Table 5</label>
<caption><p><bold>Anomalous diffusion exponent values of each occupancy of non-reactive obstacles (NRO) in the reaction space</bold>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left">NRO (%)</td>
<td align="left">0</td>
<td align="left">10</td>
<td align="left">20</td>
<td align="left">30</td>
<td align="left">40</td>
<td align="left">50</td>
<td align="left">60</td>
<td align="left">70</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">&#x003B1;</td>
<td align="left">1.0</td>
<td align="left">0.99</td>
<td align="left">0.98</td>
<td align="left">0.96</td>
<td align="left">0.92</td>
<td align="left">0.86</td>
<td align="left">0.74</td>
<td align="left">0.52</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>These simulation results are compatible with our experimental results. Both experiments and computational simulation demonstrate that <italic>in vivo</italic> reactions undergo quick response and slow exhaustion reaction processes. Furthermore, simulation revealed that the difference between <italic>in vitro</italic> and <italic>in vivo</italic> imposed by the environmental conditions is strongly correlated with the percolation threshold.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="discussion">
<label>4</label> <title>Discussion</title>
<p>The intracellular environment is densely crowded and inhomogeneous as has been observed (Medalia et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">2002</xref>). Diffusion of a molecule within a cell is restricted to the space between obstacles. To model diffusion-mediated processes, including modeling of kinetics, it is necessary to account for the effects of high concentrations of mobile reagents and immobile, non-reactant obstacles.</p>
<p>Diffusion occurring in such an environment is expected to differ from the normal diffusion of a pure random walker. In normal diffusion, the MSD is proportional to time, and the diffusion coefficient is constant. Anomalous diffusion is known to produce non-linear temporal behavior; the form of the time dependence is proportional to some power of time less than one (&#x003B1;). From this relationship, we infer a time-dependent diffusion coefficient for reactants in inhomogeneous, dense environments, of the form</p>
<disp-formula id="E24"><mml:math id="M41"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy='false'>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mo>&#x00393;</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>&#x02212;</mml:mo><mml:mi>&#x003B1;</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>which decreases to zero as <italic>t</italic>&#x02009;&#x02192;&#x02009;&#x0221E;, where &#x00393; is a constant. Mathematically anomalous diffusion is the result of deviations from the central limit theorem (Bouchaud and Georges, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">1990</xref>); physiologically, it emerges from the presence of obstacles and traps.</p>
<p>We analyzed the anomaly parameter of GFP diffusion in cytoplasm (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">1</xref>). Our results indicated that the time-dependent form of the GFP diffusion is anomalous. Comparison with results from computational simulation (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T5">5</xref>) yielded an estimated relative volume of NRO; it is approximately 60&#x02013;70% (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">1</xref>B and Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T5">5</xref>) in the cytoplasm.</p>
<p>With regards to cellular physiology, this result is compatible with reliable reports of protein&#x02013;water proportion in a cell, which comprises of 60% protein and 40% water (Fulton, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">1982</xref>).</p>
<p>We investigated whether the total concentration of protein in a cell affects reaction kinetics in the intracellular environment, or whether organized cell structure plays a dominant role. We tested our ideas physiologically by subjecting CytB-treated cells and colchicine treated cells to FCS analyses (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">2</xref>, Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">2</xref> and Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA2">A2</xref> in Appendix), also by numerical simulation (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="FA3">A3</xref> in Appendix). Cytochalasin B disrupts the equilibrium condition between the actin polymer and the monomer. Colchicine inhibits tubulin polymerization into microtubule. The disruption of these cytoskeletal filaments while maintaining the total protein concentration changed the anomaly parameter, bringing it closer to the normal condition. This result suggests that not merely the concentration of intracellular proteins, but also their physiological organization profoundly affects diffusion of free molecules in a cell. And this conclusion is supported by our simulation results. When the same volume of NRO with randomly distributed NRO is shaped cube in the reaction space, reactants did not show anomaly characteristics.</p>
<p>There exists one interesting tendency among the condition of reaction space, which is represented by &#x003B1; values and their SD. In ideal <italic>in vitro</italic> space, &#x003B1;&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0. In our results, the condition of cytoplasm of control cells is anomalous, at the same time widely varied the level of the anomaly which is represented by &#x003B1;. When we disordered cytoskeletal structures by chemical reagents, the condition of cytoplasm was still anomalous but the variety of anomaly was reduced. This seems natural if cytoskeletal disorganization changed intracellular environment from inhomogeneous space into homogeneous space. Further investigation is required to get clear conclusion from this point of view.</p>
<p>Fractals are self-similar, meaning that they exhibit similar fine-scale features at many magnifications. It was argued over 20 years ago that folded polymers, including chromatin, were fractals (Grosberg et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">1988</xref>). Two recent reports have suggested that chromatin and the nucleoplasmic space surrounding it should be added to the fractal list (Bancaud et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">2009</xref>; Lieberman-Aiden et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">2009</xref>). In order to decide whether chromatin or its surrounding nucleoplasmic space is truly fractal, we need to visualize the structures directly.</p>
<p>We used TEM to directly obtain values of cytoplasmic <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">3</xref>). The S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> is the fractal dimension of the surface of the intracellular structures (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">3</xref>B). Our S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> value is similar to those of DLA structures. This result suggests that intracellular structures may be organized in a diffusion-limited manner.</p>
<p>During the 1980s, numerical analyses were performed to estimate the <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> value of DLA. The estimated values are between <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.2&#x02013;1.4 (Meakin and Djordjevi, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">1985</xref>). Also theoretical analysis estimated <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> value as 1.32 (Alexander and Orbach, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1982</xref>). From our experimentally obtained results, we deduced a <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> of S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> (equaling the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of a DLA like intracellular structures), it is 1.34&#x02009;&#x000B1;&#x02009;0.084. Even there remains the possibility to be argued about the noise and threshold effects, the derived <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> value is supportive to estimate our assumption is proper for this analysis. Our calculation procedure for <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> is modified to accommodate experiments with real cell materials. In the numerical analysis, <italic>d<sub>w</sub></italic> and <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> are both used. Here <italic>d<sub>w</sub></italic> is the dimension of a random walker on a fractal structure. On the other hand, since we can readily analyze &#x003B1; experimentally (e.g., by FCS): we chose to use &#x003B1; and <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>. Parameters derived from experimental techniques were compatible with those obtained from previous numerical simulations and theoretical works. We also confirmed the compatibility of our experimental results with our original numerical derivation of &#x003B1;. We therefore conclude that our procedure is appropriate for experimental estimates of <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic>, and applicable further investigation of modeling reaction kinetics.</p>
<p>The M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> is the fractal dimension of the space between intracellular structures, supposedly the space available to a diffusing molecule. The value of M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> is similar to the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of an IP cluster. This result suggests that a molecule diffusing within intracellular space follows the rules of percolation.</p>
<p>The inference from our M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> result does not contradict our further investigation of reaction form and the numerical simulation results. The both reaction form estimated from the <italic>d<sub>s</sub></italic> value and stochastic model, which included NRO in its reaction space, exhibited the same characteristics; that is quick response at the early stages of a reaction and slow exhaustion after a long times (Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4">4</xref> and 5). The ratio of NRO in the reaction space in our simulation was close to the percolation threshold. All these results are consistent and support each other.</p>
<p>The results of our numerical simulation of MSD are of special interest. The curvature of the MSD versus reaction time plots depends on the relative volume of NRO in the reaction space (Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5">5</xref>C). When NRO is absent from the reaction space, the MSD of the reagent is linear in time. This case indicates the case of normal diffusion. While the spatial occupancy of NRO is below 40%, the curve appeared linear but the slope become smaller, indicating hindered diffusion. As the occupancy of NRO approaches the percolation threshold, the curve develops a concave form. Among the diffusion models, directed diffusion (MSD&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;2<italic>dD</italic><sub>0</sub><italic>t</italic>&#x02009;&#x0002B;&#x02009;<italic>v</italic><sup>2</sup><italic>t</italic><sup>2</sup>, where <italic>d</italic> is the Euclidean dimension, <italic>D</italic><sub>0</sub> is the diffusion coefficient of normal diffusion, and <italic>v</italic> is the velocity of a flow in the reaction space) appears to best describe this phenomenon. When NRO occupancy exceeds the percolation threshold, the curve developed signs anomalous or confined diffusion.</p>
<p>Therefore, such an environment may boost the diffusion velocity of a molecule if our result is correct in environments supporting NRO occupancies slightly less than the percolation threshold. Since diffusion velocity affects the reaction rate, such an environment may accelerate or enhance biochemical reactions. This phenomenon may explain the quick response at the first stage of a reaction in such a crowded space.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> value of static structures (S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>) in a cell is close to the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of diffusion-limited self-organizing aggregation. Furthermore, estimating the behavior of reactants between the aggregations is found to resemble the behaviors of molecules in the vicinity of critical percolation, as evidenced by <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> of the reactant space being close to <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s of IP.</p>
<p>Similar results have been obtained by comparing numerical simulation and <italic>in vitro</italic> self-organization of fibronectin, a component of the extracellular matrix (Berry, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">2008</xref>). This <italic>in vitro</italic> observation suggests that physiological molecules self-organize into a fractal structure. Our results suggest that actual intracellular structures organize similarly. Additionally, such an environment renders the reaction form time-dependent, favoring a <italic>quick response &#x02013; slow exhaustion</italic> process over a <italic>slow response &#x02013; quick exhaustion</italic> by constant production process, which continues until all the resources have been exhausted. The cause of both the initial quick response and remaining reaction sources could be the percolation cluster-like environment itself.</p>
<p>This property of <italic>in vivo</italic> reaction processes potentially affects the characteristics of entire biochemical networks.</p>
<p>We are planning to analyze a system level dynamics of biochemical network which includes such <italic>in vivo</italic> reaction processes and compare the dynamics with equivalent <italic>in vitro</italic> network. This investigation might suggest the characteristics of a living system.</p>
<p>Our results are applicable to aid the construction of precise <italic>in vivo</italic> oriented models.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Conflict of Interest Statement</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<app-group>
<app id="A1">
<title>Appendix</title>
<sec>
<title>The effect of threshold to produce binary images</title>
<p>We tested the effect of threshold to calculate <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>. The reason we binarized the TEM images as the black and white area keep equal size is that the estimated volume from the mass (approximately 60% of a cell; Fulton, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">1982</xref>) and general protein density (1.14, 1.30 g/ml) is approximately 50% (49.2%). Because this is approximate value based on the assumption, which the obstacles in a cell are made of protein, there remains the possibility that the approximation is too rough or the assumption is not proper. To estimate if the methodology we chose was precise or not, we changed the threshold value to 0.4 and 0.6 (the size ratio of black and white area will be 2:3 or 3:2, respectively) instead of 0.5 (which equals the size ratio of black and white area is 1:1), and investigated the effect of these changes. Obviously these alteration affect the area size for molecular movement where we assumed (the white area of binarized image). It is projected M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> values will be changed from original.</p>
<p>The results showed that changing threshold brings a change to the values of <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>s (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="TA1">A1</xref>). All the estimated <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> become 1.6 to 1.7. These values are closer to the <italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> value of reaction-limited Cluster&#x02013;Cluster Aggregation (rlCCA) model (<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic>&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.55) than the results with threshold 0.5.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="TA1">
<label>Table A1</label>
<caption><p><bold>Statistical analysis of two intracellular cellular <italic>d</italic><sub>f</sub></bold>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left">Threshold level</th>
<th align="left"><italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left">0.4</td>
<td align="left">M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.62<break/>S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.66</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">0.6</td>
<td align="left">M<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.63<break/>S<italic>d<sub>f</sub></italic> median&#x02009;&#x0003D;&#x02009;1.69</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>The statistical population consists of 165 samples for both the mobile space (Md<sub>f</sub>) and immobile structure (Sd<sub>f</sub>)</italic>.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>In rlCCA model, unit molecule behaves as Brownian particle; the probability they bind each other is infinitely close to zero. When aggregation is produced, the aggregation will be the new Brownian particle, the cluster-based units.</p>
<p>As we estimated, the change of Mdf is larger than the change of Sdf in this case. The both Sdf derived with the alternative threshold values (0.4 and 0.6) are still involved into the 99.0% confidence interval of Sdf derived with the original threshold (0.5).</p>
<p>There could be exist the cases, which a part of intracellular components are constructed with cluster-based units of molecules and the results from alternative thresholds fit better than the original to describe intracellular environment. Even such cases, it can be imagined from these results that the surfaces of the structures are rough as same as a structure constructed with single-molecular units. It will appear as the robustness of Sdf values against changing the thresold.</p>
<p>Our assumption in the article focused on the behaviors of single-molecular particle. The situation that a part of structural molecules is processed with small clusters is a probable hypothesis, but current knowledge which we used to decide the original threshold value seems inadaptable to choose the alternative thresholds. To adapt the different threshold and the models based on the results for accounting clustering units of polymers in a cell, we may need to find the other appropriate reason to change the threshold in the future.</p>
<fig id="FA1" position="float">
<label>Figure A1</label>
<caption><p><bold>Cytohistochemistry of GFP and actin</bold>. Actin proteins observed that they localize at the vicinity of plasma membrane before the treatment [<bold>(A)</bold>, upper left panel], and after the CytB treatment, actin proteins aggregated but did not move off from the vicinity of plasmamembrane [<bold>(B)</bold>, upper left panel]. On the other hand, GFP spreaded homogeneously in a cell both the case of before and after CytB treatment [<bold>(A)</bold> and <bold>(B)</bold>, upper right panels]. This means that these two proteins do not bind each other in a cell and not to be combined together by CytB treatment, neither do not move together [<bold>(A)</bold> and <bold>(B)</bold>, lower panels].</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-a001.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig id="FA2" position="float">
<label>Figure A2</label>
<caption><p><bold>Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy analysis with colchicine treated cells (A)</bold>. FCS analysis with control cells (EtOH treated). The top left panel is the image of a control cell, and the right panel is the example data of auto-correlation curve of FCS analysis. The histogram indicated in the middle panel shows the distribution of the value of anomalous parameter of control cells in eight ranges between 0.2 and 1. The bottom histogram indicates the distribution of the value of anomalous parameter of control cells in 55 ranges between 0.3 and 1 to show the mode value among the data clearly. <bold>(B)</bold> FCS analysis with colchicine treated cells. The top left panel is the image of a colchicine treated cell, and the right panel is the example data of auto-correlation curve of FCS analysis. The histogram indicated in the middle panel shows the distribution of the value of anomalous parameter of colchicine treated cells in eight ranges between 0.2 and 1.The bottom histogram indicates the distribution of the values of anomalous parameter of colchicine treated cells in 55 ranges between 0.3 and 1 to show the mode value among the data clearly.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-a002.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig id="FA3" position="float">
<label>Figure A3</label>
<caption><p><bold>Simulation results in 3D space with different shape of NRO</bold>. We simulated if the shape of NRO clusters in the simulation space affect the reaction processes. The test was performed with cubic NRO <bold>(A, C)</bold> or random NRO <bold>(B, D)</bold>. The upper panels <bold>(A, B)</bold> show the time course fluctuations of remained reactants. And the lower panels <bold>(C, D)</bold> show the time course fluctuations of MSD.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-a003.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig id="FA4" position="float">
<label>Figure A4</label>
<caption><p><bold>The fluctuation of remained reactant</bold>. The blue line is the case of homogeneous environment (<italic>k</italic> &#x0003D; &#x02212;1, constant in <italic>d</italic> [reactant]/<italic>dt</italic>). The other lines are the case of <italic>df</italic> &#x0003D; 1.0, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, respectively (cyan, black, purple, green and red). This graph shows that when <italic>df</italic> takes a value between 1&#x2009;&#x02264;&#x2009;<italic>df</italic>&#x02009;&#x003C;&#x02009;2, the reaction proceeds quick-response and slow exhaustion manner.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fphys-02-00050-a004.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
</app>
</app-group>
<ack><p>We are deeply grateful to Professor Kazunori Nakajima (Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Keio University) who kindly arranged our first meeting among Department of Pathology and Department of Biosciences and Informatics in our university. We are grateful to Dr. Kayoko Suenaga (Carl Zeiss MicroImaging Co., Ltd.) for her kind helps and big effort to perform FCS analysis with colchicine treated L-929. We are also grateful to the following people and companies who edited our manuscript; MB Brad Fast (Fastek Ltd.); Dr. Leonie Pipe (Edanz Group Ltd.). We finally would like to express our deep gratefulness to Dr. Tetsuya J. Kobayashi (Institute of Industrial Science, the University of Tokyo) for his ceaseless helps and many of kind advises.</p>
</ack>
<sec>
<title>Funding</title>
<p>This work is supported by SUNBOR grant (provided by SUNTORY Institute for Bioorganic Research, Japan), and by a Viennese Science and Technology Funds WWTF, project grant MA07-30.</p>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="B1"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Alexander</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Orbach</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1982</year>). <article-title>Density of states on fractals: fractions</article-title>. <source>J. Phys. (Paris) Lett.</source> <volume>43</volume>, <fpage>L625</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>L631</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B2"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Aon</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>O&#x00027;Rourke</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cortassa</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>The fractal architecture of cytoplasmic organization: scaling, kinetics and emergence in metabolic networks</article-title>. <source>Mol. Cell. Biochem.</source> <volume>256/257</volume>, <fpage>169</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>184</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1023/B:MCBI.0000009867.54552.09</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B3"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Atkins</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>de Paula</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <source>Elements of Physical Chemistry</source>, <edition>4th Edn</edition>, <publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B4"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bancaud</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Huet</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Daigle</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mozziconacci</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Beaudouin</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ellenberg</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Molecular crowding affects diffusion and binding of nuclear proteins in heterochromatin and reveals the fractal organization of chromatin</article-title>. <source>EMBO J.</source> <volume>28</volume>, <fpage>3785</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>3798</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/emboj.2009.340</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19927119</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B5"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Berry</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2002</year>). <article-title>Monte Carlo simulations of enzyme reactions in two dimensions: fractal kinetics and spatial segregation</article-title>. <source>Biophys. J.</source> <volume>83</volume>, <fpage>1891</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1901</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0006-3495(02)73953-2</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12324410</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B6"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Berry</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <source>Modeling Complex Biological Systems: Examples in Computational Cell Biology, Computational Neurology and application to Computer Science. Th&#x000C9;se d&#x00027;habilitation &#x000E1; diriger des recherches</source>. <publisher-loc>Paris</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Centre de Recherche Saclay-&#x000E2;le-de-France et LRI, UMR 8623 CNRS et Universit&#x000C9; Paris-Sud 11</publisher-name>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B7"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bouchaud</surname> <given-names>J. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Georges</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>Anomalous diffusion in disordered media: statistical mechanisms, models and physical applications</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rep.</source> <volume>195</volume>, <fpage>127</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>293</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0370-1573(90)90099-N</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B8"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Broadbent</surname> <given-names>S. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hammersley</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1957</year>). <article-title>Percolation processes</article-title>. <source>Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc.</source> <volume>53</volume>, <fpage>629</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>641</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S0305004100032680</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B9"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chhabra</surname> <given-names>A. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meneveau</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jensen</surname> <given-names>R. V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sreenivasan</surname> <given-names>K. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1989</year>). <article-title>Direct determination of the <italic>f</italic>(&#x003B1;) singularity spectrum and its application to fully developed turbulence</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. A</source> <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>5284</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>5294</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevA.40.5284</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9902794</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B10"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dobrescu</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Crisan</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zaharescu</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ionescu</surname> <given-names>N. I.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Fractal dimension determination of sol&#x02013;gel powders using transmission electron microscopy images</article-title>. <source>Mater. Chem. Phys.</source> <volume>87</volume>, <fpage>184</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>189</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.matchemphys.2004.05.034</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B11"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Einstein</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1905</year>). <article-title>&#x000DC;ber die von der molekularkinetischen Theorie der W&#x000E4;rme geforderte Bewegung von in ruhenden F&#x000DC;ssigkeiten suspendierten Teilchen</article-title>. <source>Ann. Phys.</source> <volume>17</volume>, <fpage>549</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>560</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/andp.19053220806</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B12"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fulton</surname> <given-names>A. B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1982</year>). <article-title>How crowded is the cytoplasm?</article-title> <source>Cell</source> <volume>30</volume>, <fpage>345</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>347</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0092-8674(82)90229-X</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">6754085</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B13"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gefen</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Aharony</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Alexander</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1983</year>). <article-title>Anomalous diffusion on percolating clusters</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. Lett.</source> <volume>50</volume>, <fpage>77</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>80</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevLett.50.77</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B14"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Grosberg</surname> <given-names>A. Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nechaev</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shakjnovich</surname> <given-names>E. I.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>The role of topological constraints in the kinetics of collapse of macromolecules</article-title>. <source>J. Phys. France</source> <volume>49</volume>, <fpage>2095</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2100</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1051/jphys:0198800490120209500</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B15"><citation citation-type="web"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hiroi</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lu</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Iba</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tabira</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yamashita</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Okada</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>K&#x000F6;hler</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Funahashi</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <source>A Study into the Crowdedness of Intracellular Environment: Estimation of Fractal Dimensionality and Anomalous Diffusion</source>. Available at: <uri xlink:href="http://www.wcsb2011.ethz.ch/">http://www.wcsb2011.ethz.ch/</uri> [WCSB2011].</citation></ref>
<ref id="B16"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jackson</surname> <given-names>M. B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <source>Molecular and Cellular Biophysics</source>. <publisher-loc>Cambridge</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Cambridge University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B17"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kohler</surname> <given-names>R. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schwille</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Webb</surname> <given-names>W. W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hanson</surname> <given-names>M. R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Focal volume optics and experimental artifacts in confocal fluorescence correlation spectroscopy</article-title>. <source>J. Cell Sci.</source> <volume>113</volume>, <fpage>3921</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>3930</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11058079</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B18"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kopelman</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Fractal Reaction Kinetics</article-title>. <source>Science</source> <volume>241</volume>, <fpage>1620</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1626</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1126/science.241.4873.1620</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17820893</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B19"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kopelman</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1991</year>). <article-title>Exciton Microscopy and Reaction Kinetics in Restricted Spaces</article-title>. <source>Phys. Chem. Mech. Mol. Radiat. Biol.</source> <volume>1</volume>, <fpage>457</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>502</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B20"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lieberman-Aiden</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>van Berkum</surname> <given-names>N. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Williams</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Imakaev</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ragoczy</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Telling</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Amit</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lajoie</surname> <given-names>B. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sabo</surname> <given-names>P. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dorschner</surname> <given-names>M. O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sandstrom</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bernstein</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bender</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Groudine</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gnirke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stamatoyannopoulos</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mirny</surname> <given-names>L. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lander</surname> <given-names>E. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dekker</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Comprehensive mapping of long-range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome</article-title>. <source>J. Phys. France</source> <volume>49</volume>, <fpage>2095</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2100</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B21"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Malchus</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Weiss</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Elucidating anomalous protein diffusion in living cells with fluorescence correlation spectroscopy &#x02013; facts and pitfalls</article-title>. <source>J. Fluoresc.</source> <volume>20</volume>, <fpage>19</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>26</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10895-009-0517-4</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19582558</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B22"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Masuda</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ushida</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Okamoto</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>New fluorescence correlation spectroscopy enabling direct observation of spatiotemporal dependence of diffusion constants as evidence of anomalous transport in extracellular matrices</article-title>. <source>Biophys. J.</source> <volume>88</volume>, <fpage>3584</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>3591</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1529/biophysj.104.048009</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15695633</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B23"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Meakin</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Djordjevi</surname> <given-names>Z. B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1985</year>). <article-title>Cluster&#x02013;cluster aggregation in two-monomer systems</article-title>. <source>J. Phys. A Math. Gen.</source> <volume>19</volume>, <fpage>2137</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2135</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1088/0305-4470/19/11/023</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B24"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Meakin</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stanley</surname> <given-names>H. E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1983</year>). <article-title>Spectral dimension for the diffusion-limited aggregation model of colloid growth</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. Lett.</source> <volume>51</volume>, <fpage>1457</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1460</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevLett.51.1457</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B25"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Medalia</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Weber</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Frangakus</surname> <given-names>A. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nicastro</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gerisch</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Baumeister</surname> <given-names>W.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2002</year>). <article-title>Macromolecular architecture in eukaryotic cells visualized by cryoelectron tomography</article-title>. <source>Science</source> <volume>298</volume>, <fpage>1209</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>1213</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1126/science.1076184</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12424373</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B26"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Parus</surname> <given-names>S. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kopelman</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1989</year>). <article-title>Self-ordering in diffusion-controlled reactions: exciton fusion experiments and simulations on naphthalene powder, percolation clusters, and impregnated porous silica</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter</source> <volume>39</volume>, <fpage>889</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>892</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevB.39.889</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9947259</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B27"><citation citation-type="web"><collab>R Development Core Team</collab>. (<year>2011</year>). <source>R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing</source>. Available at: <uri xlink:href="http://www.R-project.org/">http://www.R-project.org/</uri></citation></ref>
<ref id="B28"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rigler</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mets</surname> <given-names>&#x000DC;.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Widengren</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kask</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Fluorescence correlation spectroscopy with high count rate and low background: analysis of translational diffusion</article-title>. <source>Eur. Biophys. J.</source> <volume>22</volume>, <fpage>169</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>175</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/BF00185777</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B29"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Schnell</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Turner</surname> <given-names>T. E.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Reaction kinetics in intracellular environments with macromolecular crowding: simulations and rate laws</article-title>. <source>Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol.</source> <volume>85</volume>, <fpage>235</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>260</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2004.01.012</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15142746</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B30"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Snedecor</surname> <given-names>G. W.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cochran</surname> <given-names>W. G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1989</year>). <source>Statistical Methods</source>, <edition>8th Edn</edition>, <publisher-loc>Ames, IA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Iowa State University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B31"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Stauffer</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Aharony</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>). <source>Introduction to Percolation Theory</source>, <edition>2nd Edn</edition>. <publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Taylor &#x00026; Francis</publisher-name>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B32"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tolman</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meakin</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1989</year>). <article-title>Off-lattice and hypercubic-lattice models for diffusion-limited aggregation in dimensionalities 2&#x02013;8</article-title>. <source>Phys. Rev. A</source> <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>428</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>437</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1103/PhysRevA.40.428</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9901909</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B33"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Weiss</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Elsner</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kartberg</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nilsson</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Anomalous subdiffusion is a measure for cytoplasmic crowding living cells</article-title>. <source>Biophys. J.</source> <volume>87</volume>, <fpage>3518</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>3524</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1529/biophysj.104.044263</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15339818</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B34"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wilkinson</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Willemsen</surname> <given-names>J. F.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1983</year>). <article-title>Invasion percolation: a new form of percolation theory</article-title>. <source>J. Phys. A Math. Gen.</source> <volume>16</volume>, <fpage>3365</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>3376</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1088/0305-4470/16/14/028</pub-id></citation></ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>