ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Emergence of activation or repression in transcriptional control under a fixed molecular context.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For decades, studies have noted that transcription factors (TFs) can behave as either activators or repressors of different target genes. More recently, evidence suggests TFs can act on transcription simultaneously in positive and negative ways. Here we use biophysical models of gene regulation to define, conceptualize and explore these two aspects of TF action: "duality", where TFs can be overall both activators and repressors at the level of the transcriptional response, and "coherent and incoherent" modes of regulation, where TFs act mechanistically on a given target gene either as an activator or a repressor (coherent) or as both (incoherent). For incoherent TFs, the overall response depends on three kinds of features: the TF's mechanistic effects, the dynamics and effects of additional regulatory molecules or the transcriptional machinery, and the occupancy of the TF on DNA. Therefore, activation or repression can be tuned by just the TF-DNA binding affinity, or the number of TF binding sites, given an otherwise fixed molecular context. Moreover, incoherent TFs can cause non-monotonic transcriptional responses, increasing over a certain concentration range and decreasing outside the range, and we clarify the relationship between non-monotonicity and common assumptions of gene regulation models. Using the mammalian SP1 as a case study and well controlled, synthetically designed target sequences, we find experimental evidence for incoherent action and activation, repression or non-monotonicity tuned by affinity. Our work highlights the importance of moving from a TF-centric view to a systems view when reasoning about transcriptional control.
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.