ArticlePhysical review letters2014
Synchronization of degrade-and-fire oscillations via a common activator.
Article in Physical review letters, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feedback-delay dependence of the stability of cluster periodic orbits in populations of degrade-and-fire oscillators with common activator.Journal of mathematical biology · 2025Article
- Inferring delays in partially observed gene regulation processes.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Massive computational acceleration by using neural networks to emulate mechanism-based biological models.Nature communications · 2019Article
- Efficient analysis of stochastic gene dynamics in the non-adiabatic regime using piecewise deterministic Markov processes.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2018Article
- Emergent "Quantum" Theory in Complex Adaptive Systems.Modern physics letters. B, Condensed matter physics, statistical physics, applied physics · 2016Article
- The effects of time-varying temperature on delays in genetic networks.SIAM journal on applied dynamical systems · 2016Article
- Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
The development of synthetic gene oscillators has not only demonstrated our ability to forward engineer reliable circuits in living cells, but it has also proven to be an excellent testing ground for the statistical behavior of coupled noisy oscillators. Previous experimental studies demonstrated that a shared positive feedback can reliably synchronize such oscillators, though the theoretical mechanism was not studied in detail. In the present work, we examine an experimentally motivated stochastic model for coupled degrade-and-fire gene oscillators, where a core delayed negative feedback establishes oscillations within each cell, and a shared delayed positive feedback couples all cells. We use analytic and numerical techniques to investigate conditions for one cluster and multicluster synchrony. A nonzero delay in the shared positive feedback, as expected for the experimental systems, is found to be important for synchrony to occur.
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.