Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31658246›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2019

Epigenetic switching as a strategy for quick adaptation while attenuating biochemical noise.

Mariana Gómez-Schiavon, Nicolas E Buchler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Advantage of an epigenetic switch in response to alternate environments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  5. Evolution of a bistable genetic system in fluctuating and nonfluctuating environments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. What is life?Molecular biology reports · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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.

Mariana Gómez-SchiavonProgram in Computational Biology & Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0955-7257
Nicolas E BuchlerCenter for Genomic & Computational Biology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.

Funding

Rewiring the yeast brain: Redundancy and interference in genetic networksDP2OD008654 · OD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI BUCHLER, NICOLAS EMILE · 2011 to 2011
$2.4M
NIH HHS DP2 OD008654
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epigenetic switches are bistable, molecular systems built from self-reinforcing feedback loops that can spontaneously switch between heritable phenotypes in the absence of DNA mutation. It has been hypothesized that epigenetic switches first evolved as a mechanism of bet-hedging and adaptation, but the evolutionary trajectories and conditions by which an epigenetic switch can outcompete adaptation through genetic mutation remain unknown. Here, we used computer simulations to evolve a mechanistic, biophysical model of a self-activating genetic circuit, which can both adapt genetically through mutation and exhibit epigenetic switching. We evolved these genetic circuits under a fluctuating environment that alternatively selected for low and high protein expression levels. In all tested conditions, the population first evolved by genetic mutation towards a region of genotypes where genetic adaptation can occur faster after each environmental transition. Once in this region, the self-activating genetic circuit can exhibit epigenetic switching, which starts competing with genetic adaptation. We show a trade-off between either minimizing the adaptation time or increasing the robustness of the phenotype to biochemical noise. Epigenetic switching was superior in a fast fluctuating environment because it adapted faster than genetic mutation after an environmental transition, while still attenuating the effect of biochemical noise on the phenotype. Conversely, genetic adaptation was favored in a slowly fluctuating environment because it maximized the phenotypic robustness to biochemical noise during the constant environment between transitions, even if this resulted in slower adaptation. This simple trade-off predicts the conditions and trajectories under which an epigenetic switch evolved to outcompete genetic adaptation, shedding light on possible mechanisms by which bet-hedging strategies might emerge and persist in natural populations.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalAnimalsBiological EvolutionComputer SimulationEnvironmentEpigenesis, GeneticEpigenomicsGene Regulatory NetworksGenotypeHumansModels, GeneticModels, TheoreticalMutationPhenotypeSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID31658246
PMCPMC6837633

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.