ArticlePLoS computational biology2015
Antagonistic Coevolution Drives Whack-a-Mole Sensitivity in Gene Regulatory Networks.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2015. 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.
- Stakeholder analysis for 'One Health' approach to tackle antimicrobial resistance.BMJ global health · 2025Review
- Prevalence of and gene regulatory constraints on transcriptional adaptation in single cells.Genome biology · 2024Article
- Prevalence of and gene regulatory constraints on transcriptional adaptation in single cells.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Temperature-dependent genetics of thermotolerance between yeast species.Frontiers in ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Mitigating alemtuzumab-associated autoimmunity in MS: A "whack-a-mole" B-cell depletion strategy.Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation · 2020Article
- Inference of coevolutionary dynamics and parameters from host and parasite polymorphism data of repeated experiments.PLoS computational biology · 2020Article
- Potential for evolution of complex defense strategies in a multi-scale model of virus-host coevolution.BMC evolutionary biology · 2016Article
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
Robustness, defined as tolerance to perturbations such as mutations and environmental fluctuations, is pervasive in biological systems. However, robustness often coexists with its counterpart, evolvability--the ability of perturbations to generate new phenotypes. Previous models of gene regulatory network evolution have shown that robustness evolves under stabilizing selection, but it is unclear how robustness and evolvability will emerge in common coevolutionary scenarios. We consider a two-species model of coevolution involving one host and one parasite population. By using two interacting species, key model parameters that determine the fitness landscapes become emergent properties of the model, avoiding the need to impose these parameters externally. In our study, parasites are modeled on species such as cuckoos where mimicry of the host phenotype confers high fitness to the parasite but lower fitness to the host. Here, frequent phenotype changes are favored as each population continually adapts to the other population. Sensitivity evolves at the network level such that point mutations can induce large phenotype changes. Crucially, the sensitive points of the network are broadly distributed throughout the network and continually relocate. Each time sensitive points in the network are mutated, new ones appear to take their place. We have therefore named this phenomenon "whack-a-mole" sensitivity, after a popular fun park game. We predict that this type of sensitivity will evolve under conditions of strong directional selection, an observation that helps interpret existing experimental evidence, for example, during the emergence of bacterial antibiotic resistance.
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.