ArticleScientific reports2017
Rate-limiting steps in transcription dictate sensitivity to variability in cellular components.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anti-correlation of LacI association and dissociation rates observed in living cells.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Quantitative systems-based prediction of antimicrobial resistance evolution.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2023Review
- The route to transcription initiation determines the mode of transcriptional bursting in E. coli.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Chromosome and plasmid-borne PScientific reports · 2019Article
- Added value of autoregulation and multi-step kinetics of transcription initiation.Royal Society open science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cell-to-cell variability in cellular components generates cell-to-cell diversity in RNA and protein production dynamics. As these components are inherited, this should also cause lineage-to-lineage variability in these dynamics. We conjectured that these effects on transcription are promoter initiation kinetics dependent. To test this, first we used stochastic models to predict that variability in the numbers of molecules involved in upstream processes, such as the intake of inducers from the environment, acts only as a transient source of variability in RNA production numbers, while variability in the numbers of a molecular species controlling transcription of an active promoter acts as a constant source. Next, from single-cell, single-RNA level time-lapse microscopy of independent lineages of Escherichia coli cells, we demonstrate the existence of lineage-to-lineage variability in gene activation times and mean RNA production rates, and that these variabilities differ between promoters and inducers used. Finally, we provide evidence that this can be explained by differences in the kinetics of the rate-limiting steps in transcription between promoters and induction schemes. We conclude that cell-to-cell and consequent lineage-to-lineage variability in RNA and protein numbers are both promoter sequence-dependent and subject to regulation.
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.