Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27942033›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2016

Feedback Loops of the Mammalian Circadian Clock Constitute Repressilator.

J Patrick Pett, Anja Korenčič, Felix Wesener, Achim Kramer, Hanspeter Herzel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Mathematical Modeling in Circadian Rhythmicity.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Synergies of Multiple Zeitgebers Tune Entrainment.Frontiers in network physiology · 2021
    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

5 authors.

J Patrick PettInstitute for Theoretical Biology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Anja KorenčičCenter for Functional Genomics and Biochips, Institute of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Felix WesenerInstitute for Theoretical Biology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Achim KramerLaboratory of Chronobiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Hanspeter HerzelInstitute for Theoretical Biology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mammals evolved an endogenous timing system to coordinate their physiology and behaviour to the 24h period of the solar day. While it is well accepted that circadian rhythms are generated by intracellular transcriptional feedback loops, it is still debated which network motifs are necessary and sufficient for generating self-sustained oscillations. Here, we systematically explore a data-based circadian oscillator model with multiple negative and positive feedback loops and identify a series of three subsequent inhibitions known as "repressilator" as a core element of the mammalian circadian oscillator. The central role of the repressilator motif is consistent with time-resolved ChIP-seq experiments of circadian clock transcription factors and loss of rhythmicity in core clock gene knockouts.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticAnimalsCircadian ClocksComputational BiologyFeedback, PhysiologicalGene Regulatory NetworksMice

Identifiers

PMID27942033
PMCPMC5189953

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.