Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26068060›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2015

Convergence behaviour and Control in Non-Linear Biological Networks.

Stefan Karl, Thomas Dandekar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stefan KarlDepartment of Bioinformatics, University of Würzburg, Am Hubland, 97074 Würzburg, Germany.
Thomas DandekarDepartment of Bioinformatics, University of Würzburg, Am Hubland, 97074 Würzburg, Germany.
University of Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Control of genetic regulatory networks is challenging to define and quantify. Previous control centrality metrics, which aim to capture the ability of individual nodes to control the system, have been found to suffer from plausibility and applicability problems. Here we present a new approach to control centrality based on network convergence behaviour, implemented as an extension of our genetic regulatory network simulation framework Jimena ( http://stefan-karl.de/jimena). We distinguish three types of network control, and show how these mathematical concepts correspond to experimentally verified node functions and signalling pathways in immunity and cell differentiation: Total control centrality quantifies the impact of node mutations and identifies potential pharmacological targets such as genes involved in oncogenesis (e.g. zinc finger protein GLI2 or bone morphogenetic proteins in chondrocytes). Dynamic control centrality describes relaying functions as observed in signalling cascades (e.g. src kinase or Jak/Stat pathways). Value control centrality measures the direct influence of the value of the node on the network (e.g. Indian hedgehog as an essential regulator of proliferation in chondrocytes). Surveying random scale-free networks and biological networks, we find that control of the network resides in few high degree driver nodes and networks can be controlled best if they are sparsely connected.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAnimalsHumansNonlinear Dynamics

Identifiers

PMID26068060
PMCPMC4464179
OpenAlexW2257959582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.