ArticleBiophysical journal2019
Revisiting the Reduction of Stochastic Models of Genetic Feedback Loops with Fast Promoter Switching.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2019. 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.
- Universally valid reduction of multiscale stochastic biochemical systems using simple non-elementary propensities.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Effects of noise and time delay on E2F's expression level in a bistable Rb-E2F gene's regulatory network.IET systems biology · 2021Article
- A Stochastic Model of Gene Expression with Polymerase Recruitment and Pause Release.Biophysical journal · 2020Article
- Stochastic Modeling of Autoregulatory Genetic Feedback Loops: A Review and Comparative Study.Biophysical journal · 2020Review
- Markovian approaches to modeling intracellular reaction processes with molecular memory.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
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
Propensity functions of the Hill type are commonly used to model transcriptional regulation in stochastic models of gene expression. This leads to an effective reduced master equation for the mRNA and protein dynamics only. Based on deterministic considerations, it is often stated or tacitly assumed that such models are valid in the limit of rapid promoter switching. Here, starting from the chemical master equation describing promoter-protein interactions, mRNA transcription, protein translation, and decay, we prove that in the limit of fast promoter switching, the distribution of protein numbers is different than that given by standard stochastic models with Hill-type propensities. We show the differences are pronounced whenever the protein-DNA binding rate is much larger than the unbinding rate, a special case of fast promoter switching. Furthermore, we show using both theory and simulations that use of the standard stochastic models leads to drastically incorrect predictions for the switching properties of positive feedback loops and that these differences decrease with increasing mean protein burst size. Our results confirm that commonly used stochastic models of gene regulatory networks are only accurate in a subset of the parameter space consistent with rapid promoter switching.
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.