ArticleScientific reports2022
Relative importance of composition structures and biologically meaningful logics in bipartite Boolean models of gene regulation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Boolean networks have been widely used to model gene networks. However, such models are coarse-grained to an extent that they abstract away molecular specificities of gene regulation. Alternatively, bipartite Boolean network models of gene regulation explicitly distinguish genes from transcription factors (TFs). In such bipartite models, multiple TFs may simultaneously contribute to gene regulation by forming heteromeric complexes, thus giving rise to composition structures. Since bipartite Boolean models are relatively recent, an empirical investigation of their biological plausibility is lacking. Here, we estimate the prevalence of composition structures arising through heteromeric complexes. Moreover, we present an additional mechanism where composition structures may arise as a result of multiple TFs binding to cis-regulatory regions and provide empirical support for this mechanism. Next, we compare the restriction in BFs imposed by composition structures and by biologically meaningful properties. We find that though composition structures can severely restrict the number of Boolean functions (BFs) driving a gene, the two types of minimally complex BFs, namely nested canalyzing functions (NCFs) and read-once functions (RoFs), are comparatively more restrictive. Finally, we find that composition structures are highly enriched in real networks, but this enrichment most likely comes from NCFs and RoFs.
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.