ArticlePloS one2013
The influence of transcription factor competition on the relationship between occupancy and affinity.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcription factor control of virulence in phytopathogenic fungi.Molecular plant pathology · 2021Review
- Transcription factor target site search and gene regulation in a background of unspecific binding sites.Journal of theoretical biology · 2018Article
- Article
- Estimating binding properties of transcription factors from genome-wide binding profiles.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Transcription factors (TFs) are proteins that bind to specific sites on the DNA and regulate gene activity. Identifying where TF molecules bind and how much time they spend on their target sites is key to understanding transcriptional regulation. It is usually assumed that the free energy of binding of a TF to the DNA (the affinity of the site) is highly correlated to the amount of time the TF remains bound (the occupancy of the site). However, knowing the binding energy is not sufficient to infer actual binding site occupancy. This mismatch between the occupancy predicted by the affinity and the observed occupancy may be caused by various factors, such as TF abundance, competition between TFs or the arrangement of the sites on the DNA. We investigated the relationship between the affinity of a TF for a set of binding sites and their occupancy. In particular, we considered the case of the transcription factor lac repressor (lacI) in E.coli, and performed stochastic simulations of the TF dynamics on the DNA for various combinations of lacI abundance and competing TFs that contribute to macromolecular crowding. We also investigated the relationship of site occupancy and the information content of position weight matrices (PWMs) used to represent binding sites. Our results showed that for medium and high affinity sites, TF competition does not play a significant role for genomic occupancy except in cases when the abundance of the TF is significantly increased, or when the PWM displays relatively low information content. Nevertheless, for medium and low affinity sites, an increase in TF abundance (for both cognate and non-cognate molecules) leads to an increase in occupancy at several sites.
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.