ArticlePLoS computational biology2021
Complementary phase responses via functional differentiation of dual negative feedback loops.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. 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.
- AProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Chrononutrition: Potential, Challenges, and Application in Managing Obesity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Discrete photoentrainment of mammalian central clock is regulated by bi-stable dynamic network in the suprachiasmatic nucleus.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Impacts of the feedback loop between sense-antisense RNAs in regulating circadian rhythms.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2024Article
- The Opioid Receptor Influences Circadian Rhythms in Human Keratinocytes through the β-Arrestin Pathway.Cells · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple feedback loops are often found in gene regulations for various cellular functions. In mammalian circadian clocks, oscillations of Period1 (Per1) and Period2 (Per2) expression are caused by interacting negative feedback loops (NFLs) whose protein products with similar molecular functions repress each other. However, Per1 expression peaks earlier than Per2 in the pacemaker tissue, raising the question of whether the peak time difference reflects their different dynamical functions. Here, we address this question by analyzing phase responses of the circadian clock caused by light-induced transcription of both Per1 and Per2 mRNAs. Through mathematical analyses of dual NFLs, we show that phase advance is mainly driven by light inputs to the repressor with an earlier expression peak as Per1, whereas phase delay is driven by the other repressor with a later peak as Per2. Due to the complementary contributions to phase responses, the ratio of light-induced transcription rates between Per1 and Per2 determines the magnitude and direction of phase shifts at each time of day. Specifically, stronger Per1 light induction than Per2 results in a phase response curve (PRC) with a larger phase advance zone than delay zone as observed in rats and hamsters, whereas stronger Per2 induction causes a larger delay zone as observed in mice. Furthermore, the ratio of light-induced transcription rates required for entrainment is determined by the relation between the circadian and light-dark periods. Namely, if the autonomous period of a circadian clock is longer than the light-dark period, a larger light-induced transcription rate of Per1 than Per2 is required for entrainment, and vice versa. In short, the time difference between Per1 and Per2 expression peaks can differentiate their dynamical functions. The resultant complementary contributions to phase responses can determine entrainability of the circadian clock to the light-dark cycle.
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.