ArticleBiophysical journal2024
Quantifying and correcting bias in transcriptional parameter inference from single-cell data.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating zero-inflation correction and transcriptional kinetics for single-cell transcriptomic analysis.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Using the simple telegraph model to decipher transcriptional burst regulation across genome-wide data.iScience · 2026Article
- Transcriptional Bursting in Pluripotent Stem Cells.Biology · 2026Review
- From noise to models to numbers: Evaluating negative binomial models and parameter estimations in single-cell RNA-seq.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Monod: model-based discovery and integration through fitting stochastic transcriptional dynamics to single-cell sequencing data.Nature methods · 2025Article
- A conserved coupling of transcriptional ON and OFF periods underlies bursting dynamics.Nature structural & molecular biology · 2025Article
- Cell-cycle dependence of bursty gene expression: insights from fitting mechanistic models to single-cell RNA-seq data.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Incorporating spatial diffusion into models of bursty stochastic transcription.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- Transient power-law behaviour following induction distinguishes between competing models of stochastic gene expression.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Deterministic patterns in single-cell transcriptomic data.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2025Article
- Deciphering HIV-1 Transcription Initiation and Elongation from Single-Molecule Imaging Data.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Article
- Trajectory inference from single-cell genomics data with a process time model.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- What can we learn when fitting a simple telegraph model to a complex gene expression model?PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- New and notable: Revisiting the "two cultures" through extrinsic noise.Biophysical journal · 2024Article
- Transcriptional bursting dynamics in gene expression.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The snapshot distribution of mRNA counts per cell can be measured using single-molecule fluorescence in situ hybridization or single-cell RNA sequencing. These distributions are often fit to the steady-state distribution of the two-state telegraph model to estimate the three transcriptional parameters for a gene of interest: mRNA synthesis rate, the switching on rate (the on state being the active transcriptional state), and the switching off rate. This model assumes no extrinsic noise, i.e., parameters do not vary between cells, and thus estimated parameters are to be understood as approximating the average values in a population. The accuracy of this approximation is currently unclear. Here, we develop a theory that explains the size and sign of estimation bias when inferring parameters from single-cell data using the standard telegraph model. We find specific bias signatures depending on the source of extrinsic noise (which parameter is most variable across cells) and the mode of transcriptional activity. If gene expression is not bursty then the population averages of all three parameters are overestimated if extrinsic noise is in the synthesis rate; underestimation occurs if extrinsic noise is in the switching on rate; both underestimation and overestimation can occur if extrinsic noise is in the switching off rate. We find that some estimated parameters tend to infinity as the size of extrinsic noise approaches a critical threshold. In contrast when gene expression is bursty, we find that in all cases the mean burst size (ratio of the synthesis rate to the switching off rate) is overestimated while the mean burst frequency (the switching on rate) is underestimated. We estimate the size of extrinsic noise from the covariance matrix of sequencing data and use this together with our theory to correct published estimates of transcriptional parameters for mammalian genes.
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.