ArticleACS synthetic biology2014
Strategy revealing phenotypic differences among synthetic oscillator designs.
Article in ACS synthetic biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Topological Environment in Genetic and Metabolic Networks.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Using Monoids for the Integration of Genomic and Metabolic Parameters in the Prediction of Phenotypes in Regulatory Cascades.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Phenotype Design Space Provides a Mechanistic Framework Relating Molecular Parameters to Phenotype Diversity Available for Selection.Journal of molecular evolution · 2023Article
- A synthetic population-level oscillator in non-microfluidic environments.Communications biology · 2023Article
- Cyclin/Forkhead-mediated coordination of cyclin waves: an autonomous oscillator rationalizing the quantitative model of Cdk control for budding yeast.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2021Review
- Mechanistic Modeling of Biochemical Systems without A Priori Parameter Values Using the Design Space Toolbox v.3.0.iScience · 2020Article
- Clb3-centered regulations are recurrent across distinct parameter regions in minimal autonomous cell cycle oscillator designs.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2020Article
- Systems and synthetic biology approaches in understanding biological oscillators.Quantitative biology (Beijing, China) · 2018Article
- Incoherent Inputs Enhance the Robustness of Biological Oscillators.Cell systems · 2017Article
- Rapid Discrimination Among Putative Mechanistic Models of Biochemical Systems.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- A Statistical Approach Reveals Designs for the Most Robust Stochastic Gene Oscillators.ACS synthetic biology · 2016Article
- Design Space Toolbox V2: Automated Software Enabling a Novel Phenotype-Centric Modeling Strategy for Natural and Synthetic Biological Systems.Frontiers in genetics · 2016Article
- Design principles for robust oscillatory behavior.Systems and synthetic biology · 2015Article
- Computational analysis of an autophagy/translation switch based on mutual inhibition of MTORC1 and ULK1.PloS one · 2015Article
- Elucidating the genotype-phenotype map by automatic enumeration and analysis of the phenotypic repertoire.NPJ systems biology and applicationsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Considerable progress has been made in identifying and characterizing the component parts of genetic oscillators, which play central roles in all organisms. Nonlinear interaction among components is sufficiently complex that mathematical models are required to elucidate their elusive integrated behavior. Although natural and synthetic oscillators exhibit common architectures, there are numerous differences that are poorly understood. Utilizing synthetic biology to uncover basic principles of simpler circuits is a way to advance understanding of natural circadian clocks and rhythms. Following this strategy, we address the following questions: What are the implications of different architectures and molecular modes of transcriptional control for the phenotypic repertoire of genetic oscillators? Are there designs that are more realizable or robust? We compare synthetic oscillators involving one of three architectures and various combinations of the two modes of transcriptional control using a methodology that provides three innovations: a rigorous definition of phenotype, a procedure for deconstructing complex systems into qualitatively distinct phenotypes, and a graphical representation for illuminating the relationship between genotype, environment, and the qualitatively distinct phenotypes of a system. These methods provide a global perspective on the behavioral repertoire, facilitate comparisons of alternatives, and assist the rational design of synthetic gene circuitry. In particular, the results of their application here reveal distinctive phenotypes for several designs that have been studied experimentally as well as a best design among the alternatives that has yet to be constructed and tested.
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.