ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2015
Stochastic focusing coupled with negative feedback enables robust regulation in biochemical reaction networks.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2015. 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.
- Inherent regulatory asymmetry emanating from network architecture in a prevalent autoregulatory motif.eLife · 2020Article
- Dynamic disorder in simple enzymatic reactions induces stochastic amplification of substrate.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2017Article
- The dynamic mechanism of noisy signal decoding in gene regulation.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Mechanisms of stochastic focusing and defocusing in biological reaction networks: insight from accurate chemical master equation (ACME) solutions.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nature presents multiple intriguing examples of processes that proceed with high precision and regularity. This remarkable stability is frequently counter to modellers' experience with the inherent stochasticity of chemical reactions in the regime of low-copy numbers. Moreover, the effects of noise and nonlinearities can lead to 'counterintuitive' behaviour, as demonstrated for a basic enzymatic reaction scheme that can display stochastic focusing (SF). Under the assumption of rapid signal fluctuations, SF has been shown to convert a graded response into a threshold mechanism, thus attenuating the detrimental effects of signal noise. However, when the rapid fluctuation assumption is violated, this gain in sensitivity is generally obtained at the cost of very large product variance, and this unpredictable behaviour may be one possible explanation of why, more than a decade after its introduction, SF has still not been observed in real biochemical systems. In this work, we explore the noise properties of a simple enzymatic reaction mechanism with a small and fluctuating number of active enzymes that behaves as a high-gain, noisy amplifier due to SF caused by slow enzyme fluctuations. We then show that the inclusion of a plausible negative feedback mechanism turns the system from a noisy signal detector to a strong homeostatic mechanism by exchanging high gain with strong attenuation in output noise and robustness to parameter variations. Moreover, we observe that the discrepancy between deterministic and stochastic descriptions of stochastically focused systems in the evolution of the means almost completely disappears, despite very low molecule counts and the additional nonlinearity due to feedback. The reaction mechanism considered here can provide a possible resolution to the apparent conflict between intrinsic noise and high precision in critical intracellular processes.
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.