ArticlePLoS computational biology2013
Cell-cycle dependence of transcription dominates noise in gene expression.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
92 citing papers in PubMed.
- Programmable promoter editing for precise control of transgene expression.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- Impact of variability in cell generation times on cell-to-cell variability of protein concentrations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Stochastic Gene Expression Model with State-Dependent Protein Activation Delay.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Cyclo-stationary distributions of mRNA and Protein counts for random cell division times.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Gradient matching accelerates mixed-effects inference for biochemical networks.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- How to build the virtual cell with artificial intelligence: Priorities and opportunities.Cell · 2024Article
- How to Build the Virtual Cell with Artificial Intelligence: Priorities and Opportunities.ArXiv · 2024Article
- Rewinding the Tape to Identify Intrinsic Determinants of Reprogramming Potential.Cellular reprogramming · 2024Article
- Single-cell analysis of VACV infection reveals pathogen-driven timing of early and late phases and host-limited dynamics of virus production.PLoS pathogens · 2024Article
- Programmable promoter editing for precise control of transgene expression.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Effect of genomic and cellular environments on gene expression noise.Genome biology · 2024Article
- Quantifying and correcting bias in transcriptional parameter inference from single-cell data.Biophysical journal · 2024Article
- Transcriptional bursting dynamics in gene expression.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Review
- Article
- Out-of-equilibrium gene expression fluctuations in the presence of extrinsic noise.Physical biology · 2023Article
- Transcription factor fluctuations underlie cell-to-cell variability in a signaling pathway response.Genetics · 2023Article
- Article
- The sound of silence: Transgene silencing in mammalian cell engineering.Cell systems · 2022Review
- Transcription factor binding process is the primary driver of noise in gene expression.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The large variability in mRNA and protein levels found from both static and dynamic measurements in single cells has been largely attributed to random periods of transcription, often occurring in bursts. The cell cycle has a pronounced global role in affecting transcriptional and translational output, but how this influences transcriptional statistics from noisy promoters is unknown and generally ignored by current stochastic models. Here we show that variable transcription from the synthetic tetO promoter in S. cerevisiae is dominated by its dependence on the cell cycle. Real-time measurements of fluorescent protein at high expression levels indicate tetO promoters increase transcription rate ∼2-fold in S/G2/M similar to constitutive genes. At low expression levels, where tetO promoters are thought to generate infrequent bursts of transcription, we observe random pulses of expression restricted to S/G2/M, which are correlated between homologous promoters present in the same cell. The analysis of static, single-cell mRNA measurements at different points along the cell cycle corroborates these findings. Our results demonstrate that highly variable mRNA distributions in yeast are not solely the result of randomly switching between periods of active and inactive gene expression, but instead largely driven by differences in transcriptional activity between G1 and S/G2/M.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.