ArticlePhysical review. E2026
Dynamics of inducible genetic circuits.
Article in Physical review. E, 2026. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genes are connected in complex networks of interactions where often the product of one gene is a transcription factor that alters the expression of another. Many of these networks are based on a few fundamental motifs leading to switches and oscillators of various kinds. And, yet, there is more to the story than knowing which transcription factors control these various circuits. These transcription factors are often themselves under the control of effector molecules that bind them and alter their level of activity. Traditionally, much beautiful work has shown how to think about the stability of the different states achieved by these fundamental regulatory architectures by examining how parameters such as transcription rates, degradation rates, and dissociation constants tune the circuit, giving rise to behavior such as bistability. Such studies, however, explore dynamics without asking how these quantities are altered in real time within living cells as opposed to at the fingertips of the synthetic biologist's pipette or on the computational biologist's computer screen. In this paper, we make a departure from the conventional dynamical systems view of these regulatory motifs by using statistical mechanical models to focus on endogenous signaling knobs such as effector concentrations rather than on the convenient but more experimentally remote knobs such as transcription rates, degradation rates, and dissociation constants. We also contrast the traditional use of Hill functions to describe transcription factor binding with more detailed thermodynamic models. This approach provides insights into how biological parameters are tuned to control the stability of regulatory motifs in living cells, sometimes revealing quite a different picture than is found using Hill functions and tuning circuit parameters by hand.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42141618What 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.