Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38743803›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2024

What can we learn when fitting a simple telegraph model to a complex gene expression model?

Feng Jiao, Jing Li, Ting Liu, Yifeng Zhu, Wenhao Che, Leonidas Bleris, Chen Jia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Invariant nonequilibrium dynamics in gene regulation optimize information flow.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Simulation-based inference captures non-Markovian effects as exemplified in protein production kinetics through cell division.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

7 authors.

Feng JiaoGuangzhou Center for Applied Mathematics, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Jing LiGuangzhou Center for Applied Mathematics, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Ting LiuGuangzhou Center for Applied Mathematics, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Yifeng ZhuGuangzhou Center for Applied Mathematics, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Wenhao CheGuangzhou Center for Applied Mathematics, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Leonidas BlerisBioengineering Department, The University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas, United States of America.
Chen JiaApplied and Computational Mathematics Division, Beijing Computational Science Research Center, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3375-4373

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 12271118National Natural Science Foundation of China with NSAF 12271020National Natural Science Foundation of China with NSAF U2230402U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) 2029121
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In experiments, the distributions of mRNA or protein numbers in single cells are often fitted to the random telegraph model which includes synthesis and decay of mRNA or protein, and switching of the gene between active and inactive states. While commonly used, this model does not describe how fluctuations are influenced by crucial biological mechanisms such as feedback regulation, non-exponential gene inactivation durations, and multiple gene activation pathways. Here we investigate the dynamical properties of four relatively complex gene expression models by fitting their steady-state mRNA or protein number distributions to the simple telegraph model. We show that despite the underlying complex biological mechanisms, the telegraph model with three effective parameters can accurately capture the steady-state gene product distributions, as well as the conditional distributions in the active gene state, of the complex models. Some effective parameters are reliable and can reflect realistic dynamic behaviors of the complex models, while others may deviate significantly from their real values in the complex models. The effective parameters can also be applied to characterize the capability for a complex model to exhibit multimodality. Using additional information such as single-cell data at multiple time points, we provide an effective method of distinguishing the complex models from the telegraph model. Furthermore, using measurements under varying experimental conditions, we show that fitting the mRNA or protein number distributions to the telegraph model may even reveal the underlying gene regulation mechanisms of the complex models. The effectiveness of these methods is confirmed by analysis of single-cell data for E. coli and mammalian cells. All these results are robust with respect to cooperative transcriptional regulation and extrinsic noise. In particular, we find that faster relaxation speed to the steady state results in more precise parameter inference under large extrinsic noise.

Indexed as

Gene ExpressionModels, GeneticAnimalsEscherichia coliGene Regulatory NetworksMiceProteinsRNA, MessengerSingle-Cell Gene Expression AnalysisProteinsRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID38743803
PMCPMC11125521

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.