Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27058315›Full record

ReviewReports on progress in physics. Physical Society (Great Britain)2016

Information processing in bacteria: memory, computation, and statistical physics: a key issues review.

Ganhui Lan, Yuhai Tu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reports on progress in physics. Physical Society (Great Britain), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Nature physics · 2026
    Article
  2. Metareview: a survey of active matter reviews.The European physical journal. E, Soft matter · 2025
    Review
  3. Speed-dependent bacterial surface swimming.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Quantifying information of intracellular signaling: progress with machine learning.Reports on progress in physics. Physical Society (Great Britain) · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Improved bounds on entropy production in living systems.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Entropy Production in Exactly Solvable Systems.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Decoding the chemotactic signal.Journal of leukocyte biology · 2018
    Review
  18. Drift and Behavior of E. coli Cells.Biophysical journal · 2017
    Article
  19. Modeling themSystems
    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.

Ganhui LanGeorge Washington University, Washington DC 20052, USA.
Yuhai TuIBM T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, USA.

Funding

Quantitative Modeling of Signal Transduction in Bacterial ChemotaxisR01GM081747 · NIGMS · IBM THOMAS J. WATSON RESEARCH CENTER · PI TU, YUHAI · 2007 to 2018
$2.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM081747
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Living systems have to constantly sense their external environment and adjust their internal state in order to survive and reproduce. Biological systems, from as complex as the brain to a single E. coli cell, have to process these data in order to make appropriate decisions. How do biological systems sense external signals? How do they process the information? How do they respond to signals? Through years of intense study by biologists, many key molecular players and their interactions have been identified in different biological machineries that carry out these signaling functions. However, an integrated, quantitative understanding of the whole system is still lacking for most cellular signaling pathways, not to say the more complicated neural circuits. To study signaling processes in biology, the key thing to measure is the input-output relationship. The input is the signal itself, such as chemical concentration, external temperature, light (intensity and frequency), and more complex signals such as the face of a cat. The output can be protein conformational changes and covalent modifications (phosphorylation, methylation, etc), gene expression, cell growth and motility, as well as more complex output such as neuron firing patterns and behaviors of higher animals. Due to the inherent noise in biological systems, the measured input-output dependence is often noisy. These noisy data can be analysed by using powerful tools and concepts from information theory such as mutual information, channel capacity, and the maximum entropy hypothesis. This information theory approach has been successfully used to reveal the underlying correlations between key components of biological networks, to set bounds for network performance, and to understand possible network architecture in generating observed correlations. Although the information theory approach provides a general tool in analysing noisy biological data and may be used to suggest possible network architectures in preserving information, it does not reveal the underlying mechanism that leads to the observed input-output relationship, nor does it tell us much about which information is important for the organism and how biological systems use information to carry out specific functions. To do that, we need to develop models of the biological machineries, e.g. biochemical networks and neural networks, to understand the dynamics of biological information processes. This is a much more difficult task. It requires deep knowledge of the underlying biological network-the main players (nodes) and their interactions (links)-in sufficient detail to build a model with predictive power, as well as quantitative input-output measurements of the system under different perturbations (both genetic variations and different external conditions) to test the model predictions to guide further development of the model. Due to the recent growth of biological knowledge thanks in part to high throughput methods (sequencing, gene expression microarray, etc) and development of quantitative in vivo techniques such as various florescence technology, these requirements are starting to be realized in different biological systems. The possible close interaction between quantitative experimentation and theoretical modeling has made systems biology an attractive field for physicists interested in quantitative biology. In this review, we describe some of the recent work in developing a quantitative predictive model of bacterial chemotaxis, which can be considered as the hydrogen atom of systems biology. Using statistical physics approaches, such as the Ising model and Langevin equation, we study how bacteria, such as E. coli, sense and amplify external signals, how they keep a working memory of the stimuli, and how they use these data to compute the chemical gradient. In particular, we will describe how E. coli cells avoid cross-talk in a heterogeneous receptor cluster to keep a ligand-specific memory. We will also study the thermodynamic costs of adaptation for cells to maintain an accurate memory. The statistical physics based approach described here should be useful in understanding design principles for cellular biochemical circuits in general.

Indexed as

ChemotaxisEscherichia coliPhysicsModels, TheoreticalSignal Transduction

Identifiers

PMID27058315
PMCPMC4955840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.